On Fri, 2007-07-06 at 20:15 +0200, Dirk Bonengel wrote:
> guenther schrieb:
> > Unfortunately, the example iXhash.cf of (current) version 1.0 is rather
> > scarce when it comes to the definitions. I'd wish for these to become as
> > informative again as they used to be. FWIW, these verbose descriptions
> > and comments have been the reason for me to pick 2 out of 3 lists in the
> > first place, long ago. (Which doesn't mean I am not re-evaluating this
> > decision. In fact, the third one seems to be highly accurate, too --
> > granted, based on some brief, non-exhaustive tests...)
> >
> >
> > Revision 23 of your plugins old home claims this:
> > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/iXhash?action=diff
[...]
> > So, the most important question is: Does this still hold true?
> those comments have been changed to today's because:
> - They're not true any more for nospam.login-solutions.de; they are fed
> from 'high quality' input
> - They're to long: Older SA version have a limit of 50 chars I wasn't
> aware of at first
Please note that I am particularly missing the verbose *comments* you
offered with previous versions, and somewhat detailed info where
possible (in the worst case, "anonymous feed" would do).
I am not talking about the SA rule descriptions.
> I promised in an earlier reply to Per that I'll add some more info to
> website and archive but give me some time as $iXhash ne $dayjob
Fair enough. :) I must have missed that promise, cause it is pretty
much what I am missing...
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
