Ken Hornstein writes: > >Well Ken, we did discuss this a long time ago. I seem to recall that > >someone had said that they were gonna redo the scan code as it was full > >of DEC-era optimizations. The changes to show would seem to be pretty > >easy. Super busy these days but if anyone else felt like working on > >it with me I'd think about it. To me it's the flip side of the attachment > >code that I wrote 25? years ago; I made it much easier to send attachments > >but the receiving end was just too hard with the code base at the time. > > Ha! Fair point, and obviously that hasn't happened. The changes to show > aren't as easy as you think, because for one you'd have to figure out > how to extend m_convert() and the associated data structures to indicate > message parts. > > --Ken
Ken - stop egging me on :-) So I think that I respectfully disagree. My notion of show is just an improved UI for mhshow so that show 1.2 shows message 1 part 2. And now you've done it - my notion of scan is just a mashup of scan and mhlist. So maybe not so difficult after all. That doesn't mean I'm signing up - super over-committed at the moment. Jon
