On Mar 5, 2012 11:11 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 22:55:54 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Mar 5, 2012 5:43 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> > wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kur
On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 22:55:54 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2012 5:43 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <
> dmitry.kurochkin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 1
On Mar 5, 2012 11:11 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 22:55:54 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Mar 5, 2012 5:43 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> > wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kur
On Mar 5, 2012 5:43 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
wrote:
> > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <
dmitry.kurochkin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
wrote:
> > > > notmuch-saved-s
On Mar 5, 2012 5:43 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
> I do not buy the argument that we should help users who implement their
> own sorting functions but do not read documentation for functions they
> use. Apparently, those who implemented the `sort' function had similar
> ideas. And I do not think it is
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> > wrote:
> > > notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> > > input (`sort' does
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> > wrote:
> > > notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> > > input (`sort' does
On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 22:55:54 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2012 5:43 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <
> dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 1 Mar
On Mar 5, 2012 5:43 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
> I do not buy the argument that we should help users who implement their
> own sorting functions but do not read documentation for functions they
> use. Apparently, those who implemented the `sort' function had similar
> ideas. And I do not think it is
On Mar 5, 2012 5:43 PM, "Dmitry Kurochkin"
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
wrote:
> > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
wrote:
> > > > notmuch-saved-sear
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> wrote:
> > notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> > input (`sort' does that, for instance), so it should not be given
> > notmuch-saved-searches directl
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> > wrote:
> > > notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> > > input (`sort' does that, for
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:17:43 +0100, Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
> > wrote:
> > > notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> > > input (`sort' does that, for
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
wrote:
> notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> input (`sort' does that, for instance), so it should not be given
> notmuch-saved-searches directly.
> ---
-1
I think we should require `notmuch-saved-search-sort-func
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 06:21:52 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> > notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> > input (`sort' does that, for instance), so it should not be given
> > notmuch-saved-searches directly.
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> input (`sort' does that, for instance), so it should not be given
> notmuch-saved-searches directly.
> ---
-1
I think we should require `notmuch-saved-search-sort-funct
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe
wrote:
> notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> input (`sort' does that, for instance), so it should not be given
> notmuch-saved-searches directly.
Hi Daniel, thanks for fixing this. Works for me.
Full disclosure:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:24:38 +0100, Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
> input (`sort' does that, for instance), so it should not be given
> notmuch-saved-searches directly.
Hi Daniel, thanks for fixing this. Works for me.
Full disclosure: I
notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
input (`sort' does that, for instance), so it should not be given
notmuch-saved-searches directly.
---
emacs/notmuch-hello.el |5 -
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-hello.el b/emac
notmuch-saved-search-sort-function might destructively modify its
input (`sort' does that, for instance), so it should not be given
notmuch-saved-searches directly.
---
emacs/notmuch-hello.el |5 -
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-hello.el b/emac
20 matches
Mail list logo
