On 2000.05.25, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mikko Hänninen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ~L alice ~L bob ~L carol ^~L (alice\|bob\|carol)
>
> I'm curious, do you really need the first part, the three matches?
> The last part should do their job too. Since you tried these things,
> I suppose you tested it without them too...
Yes, I do. The second part does't guarantee that a message is to/from
all three. The first three patterns (ANDed) make sure that all three
people get the message, and the last pattern makes sure that ONLY those
three get it.
Without it, a message from Alice to Bob (excluding Carol) is still
matched.
> Well, it does, but it parses from "top down" -- it takes the whole
> string first, and then splits it up to expressions. | can be "or",
> so it splits it at that. It doesn't look at the context.
>
> You can avoid it by quoting it, like you did, or by giving the pattern
> in quotes: "^~L (alice|bob|carol)" (or something like that).
Ah, I see. It's ^~L "(alice|bob|carol)". Precedence would be a good
topic for the manual to go over quickly.
> > do that. Is there some way to get $alternates into the expression?
>
> I don't think there's any way to expands a random Mutt variable in these
> situations, only the %-expandos...
That's what I think, too, for the present.
> > Should there be? I'm happy with a "yes" to either question. :)
>
> That's a "no" and a "maybe"... Sorry, no "yes". :-)
"Wait and see" -- you are wise. Well, here's an example of wanting to
evaluate your own address, where ~P and ~p are not enough. I'm not
sure what an appropriate solution would be, except for permitting
expansion of any "set" variable in the editor, but I can understand
reluctance to do that.
--
-D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] NSIT University of Chicago
