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; }}}