>Thanks guys for the quick reply and suggestions! > >Ken: yeah, I can see how messy that's going to be; alas that >%(trim) indeed doesn't return its result. Although I'll probably >see this again, it'd be maybe 1x/year for the next couple years. >(And, who knows, maybe their IT department will fix it? B-) Not >worth complicating my replcomps; easier to just manually add the >"To:" field in vim. B-)
I thought initially that %(trim) was recent, but no, it isn't ... it existed back in MH 6.8, and I am kinda surprised that the authors of %(trim) didn't make it return a value, because they actually knew the format engine pretty well (it has a number of subtle bits of behavior that I have only learned about after staring at the code for a while, and I wrote fmttest(1) because it is so confusing). We can't really change the behavior of %(trim), but we COULD easily add a new function (maybe %(trimr) ?) that would return a value and be easier for you to use in this case. But it wouldn't appear until a new nmh was released. --Ken -- nmh-workers https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
