Ken Hornstein <k...@pobox.com> writes:
> Hm. I'm torn. So, it looks like it's okay in terms of syntax; "_" is
> not a valid character in a sequence. But what are the semantics if
> 'name' refers to more than one message?
Then name+n is the nth message of name; name_n is the nth to last message of
name.(1 based ordinals. That is, name+1 is the first message of name and name_1
is the last message of name).
If name has fewer than n messages then I would prefer an abort with error
message. Paul Fox would, I gather, prefer a semantics where name+n and name_n
are always meaningful.
Norman Shapiro
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
