On 2019-06-26 10:22:04 +0200, Daan van Rossum wrote:
> I also don't use %c for the same reason. Fixing the units to 'k'
> would make me switch to %c instead of %l as well...
Having an integer value with the KB unit would also be OK for me.
I don't care much about accurate values for small
* Patrick Shanahan [06-26-19 07:17]:
> * Daan van Rossum [06-26-19 04:27]:
> > * on Wednesday, 2019-06-26 09:13 +0200, Moritz Barsnick
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > > hard to see the difference between 1.3k and 1.3M at a quick glimpse
> > > > > across the index.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, perhaps the
* Daan van Rossum [06-26-19 04:27]:
> * on Wednesday, 2019-06-26 09:13 +0200, Moritz Barsnick
> wrote:
>
> > > > hard to see the difference between 1.3k and 1.3M at a quick glimpse
> > > > across the index.
> > >
> > > Yes, perhaps the reason I do not use %c. And the fact that the
> > >
* on Wednesday, 2019-06-26 09:13 +0200, Moritz Barsnick
wrote:
> > > hard to see the difference between 1.3k and 1.3M at a quick glimpse
> > > across the index.
> >
> > Yes, perhaps the reason I do not use %c. And the fact that the
> > scaling facteur is on the right instead of the left makes
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 21:01:44 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Note that the %c value also depends on the encoding, but this may
> be less surprising.
Quite obviously. It also includes PGP and S/MIME boilerplate and so on.
Misleading regarding the size of the actual text, but quite clear about
On 2019-06-25 19:46:39 +0200, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> I agree. OTOH, I have received messages with large one-liner HTML
> attachments which obviously seemed small. Or people write plain text
> paragraphs without breaking lines ...
I've noticed that too.
> %c is what shows the size of the
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 10:33:11AM -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 01:27:35PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
> > On Monday, 2019-06-24 18:41:56 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> > > Or just remove it. If it's not accurate (or even if it is) what value
> > > can it really provide?
> >
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 01:27:35PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
> On Monday, 2019-06-24 18:41:56 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> > Or just remove it. If it's not accurate (or even if it is) what value
> > can it really provide?
>
> Even if it isn't accurate it gives me a rough idea about the size of
Hi,
On Monday, 2019-06-24 18:41:56 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> Or just remove it. If it's not accurate (or even if it is) what value
> can it really provide?
Even if it isn't accurate it gives me a rough idea about the size of the
message (usually after viewed already which calculates the
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 06:41:56PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 10:47:42PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > I think that the manual should say more about these issues.
> > Perhaps discourage this sequence?
>
> Or just remove it. If it's not accurate (or even if it is)
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 10:47:42PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> The manual says:
>
> %l number of lines in the message
> (does not work with maildir, mh,
> and possibly IMAP folders)
>
On 2019-06-23 06:31, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
...the provided "Lines:" header is not necessarily reliable.
Right. I've seen it wrong many times.
Not from Mutt--when Mutt writes a message to an mbox file, it generates
Lines: and Content-Length:, both correctly. But Mutt is not the only
On 2019-06-22 21:53:11 -0400, Kurt Hackenberg wrote:
> On 2019-06-22 16:47, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> > The manual says:
> >
> > %l number of lines in the message
> > (does not work with maildir, mh,
> >
* Kurt Hackenberg [06-22-19 21:54]:
> On 2019-06-22 16:47, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> > The manual says:
> >
> > %l number of lines in the message
> > (does not work with maildir, mh,
> >
On 2019-06-22 16:47, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
The manual says:
%l number of lines in the message
(does not work with maildir, mh,
and possibly IMAP folders)
Seems not very useful if it
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 02:17:37AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
See commit 6a74e24e57dd78a9de3d7676bd7c6d2f42228a8d.
Is this OK?
Yes, that looks great. Thank you.
BTW, I've noticed that the style used in the manual is not consistent:
* the letter case for the folder types (mbox, mmdf,
On 2019-06-22 14:15:25 -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 10:47:42PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > I think that the manual should say more about these issues. Perhaps
> > discourage this sequence?
>
> I agree it would be good to mention these details. Would you like to
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 10:47:42PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I think that the manual should say more about these issues.
Perhaps discourage this sequence?
I agree it would be good to mention these details. Would you like to
commit a fix, or should I put this on my todo list?
Thank you,
The manual says:
%l number of lines in the message
(does not work with maildir, mh,
and possibly IMAP folders)
I think that it should emphasize on the fact that this is the number
of lines
19 matches
Mail list logo
