On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 08:30:56PM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
I'm not dead set against it, but I've never thought the macros or naming were confusing.Making the implementation of each the same seems like a good idea, but I think it would be a shame to get ride of the skip_xxx() and is_xxx() macros. To me they make the code more readable, not less.
I will add that veering into needing to implement our own strchrnul() and using not-yet standardized C constructs like '?:' feel like it's going a bit too far though, for a minor cleanup. Mutt moves slowly, and still is meant to work on (somewhat) older systems.
-- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
