sidebar inconsistencies or misunderstandings
Playing around with the sidebar I came up with a few inconsistencies or most likely misunderstandings. Maybe someone could enlighten me please? * The sidebar really cannot see a difference between NEW and OLD mails? So, %N shows the sum of NEW and OLD mails? But then, how is the value %n calculated? (N if mailbox has new mail, blank otherwise) And buffy-list also knows which mailboxes have new mail. Well, but not how many. * I tried "unset mail_check_recent" and "set mark_old" as the manual suggests in section 3.164 but I don't see a difference. * %n is not updated when the mailbox is modified externally. check-stats or check-new do not update it either. But: Turning the sidebar off and on sometimes(!) does update it. (mail_check_stats is set and mail_check_stats_interval=30) * sidebar-next-new does not jump to the next mailbox with new mail (according to %n) but only skips mailboxes with no unread (%N==0) mails. And finally a curious question about the mailbox browser: Is there a function/method "next-new" (like "sidebar-next-new") to jump to the next mailbox with new mail? Thanks so much, Andy -- If you have good memory you can forget the rest.
Re: Muttlisp question
> Oh, I meant less efficient because the evaluation is done every time the key > is pressed when using the macro. Plus it's a macro executing a > which is evaluating MuttLisp. Oh, of course! You are right. What was I thinking? Maybe I should stop tweaking my mutt config and go to bed? :-) Thanks, Andy -- There is no kind of dishonesty into which otherwise good people more easily and frequently fall than that of defrauding the government. (Benjamin Franklin)
Re: Muttlisp question
On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 10:08:04PM +0100, Andy Spiegl wrote: Well, you could try putting the keybindings such as Sure, but weren't we talking about efficency, i.e. without Muttlisp? :-) Oh, I meant less efficient because the evaluation is done every time the key is pressed when using the macro. Plus it's a macro executing a which is evaluating MuttLisp. The bind cost is paid a single time, when toggling the sidebar, but not when pressing the key. -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Muttlisp question
> Sorry I wasn't clear enough. Now I understood it. Thank you very much! > Well, you could try putting the keybindings such as Sure, but weren't we talking about efficency, i.e. without Muttlisp? :-) Thanks, Andy -- The brain is a wonderful organ; it starts working the moment you get up in the morning, and does not stop until you get to work.
Re: Muttlisp question
On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 08:47:27PM +0100, Andy Spiegl wrote: The muttlisp can't be inside quotes, so I removed the outer single quotes. Is this only true for "bind" lines? Because in the macro the muttlisp code is inside quotes: macro index j 'run (if (equal $sidebar_visible "yes") \ "exec sidebar-next" \ "exec next-undeleted")' Sorry I wasn't clear enough. When a command is read and executed by the muttrc parser, a MuttLisp argument can't be surrounded by quotes. That is, the muttrc parser won't look inside a quoted argument for MuttLisp. The above macro, when initially read in from your .muttrc, won't look for MuttLisp in the third argument. However, when the macro is executed, by pressing 'j', it starts a command prompt, using . The line: run (if (equal $sidebar_visible "yes") "exec sidebar-next" "exec next-undeleted") is then read and executed by the muttrc parser when is processed at the end of the macro. At that time, it will evaluate the first argument to the run command as MuttLisp because it is not surrounded by a quote. Note that surrounding the macro with single quotes prevents the evaulation of $sidebar_visible when the muttrc is evaluated. So the MuttLisp above will look at the value of $sidebar_visible when it is executed. It's a bit less efficient, so if that's a concern, you could just use a macro to toggle $sidebar_visible and at the same time source a file with the special "sidebar toggling" bind commands. Good idea but how would I set the key bindings depending on the visibility state of the sidebar? I'd need some kind of if-then-else because the toggle macro doesn't "know" the state. Or can you think of a smart method to do that? Well, you could try putting the keybindings such as bind index j (if (equal $sidebar_visible "yes") \ 'sidebar-next' \ 'next-undeleted') bind index k (if (equal $sidebar_visible "yes") \ 'sidebar-prev \ 'previous-undeleted') [...] in a file '~/.mutt/sidebar-bindings' and then macro index ^ "\ toggle sidebar_visible\ source ~/.mutt/sidebar-bindings\ " -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Muttlisp question
Kevin, thanks a lot! This was exactly what I was looking for. > The muttlisp can't be inside quotes, so I removed the outer single > quotes. Is this only true for "bind" lines? Because in the macro the muttlisp code is inside quotes: > macro index j 'run (if (equal $sidebar_visible "yes") \ > "exec sidebar-next" \ > "exec next-undeleted")' > It's a bit less efficient, so if that's a concern, you could just use a > macro to toggle $sidebar_visible and at the same time source a file with the > special "sidebar toggling" bind commands. Good idea but how would I set the key bindings depending on the visibility state of the sidebar? I'd need some kind of if-then-else because the toggle macro doesn't "know" the state. Or can you think of a smart method to do that? My first guess would have been like this: macro index ^ "\ toggle sidebar_visible\ bind index,pager j next-undeleted\< this line depends " \ "hide mutt sidebar and set key bindings" Thanks, Andy -- If it's true that we are here to help others, then what exactly are the OTHERS here for?
