On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 12:21 +0200, Matus UHLAR wrote:
> I often receive see mail where X-Spam-Report header is longer than 80
> characters. This causes mutt to re-wrap the header, which causes the header
> be hardly readable. Since SA already wraps other headers, can we consider
> that as a bug or does that have an reason/option to tune?
No option to tune. Come on. ;)
After a quick look at the code, I guess I see what's going on. Actually
confirmed my suspicion looking at your headers. Probably worth filing a
low priority, enhancement / minor bug.
> * 1.8 HTML_NONELEMENT_30_40 BODY: 30% to 40% of HTML elements are
> * non-standard
> * 0.6 HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02 BODY: HTML has a low ratio of text to image area
This shows it quite nicely. The first one is exactly 80 chars long (yes,
indeed), while the second one is shorter, only 76 chars. So why should
we wrap the latter?
I guess the problem is with the leading tab. The \t is a *single* char,
thus leading to the wrapping problem -- when displaying a tab 8 spaces
wide.
M::SA::PerMsgStatus::_process_header() calls M::SA::Util::wrap() with a
line width of 79. Simply using 72 instead is quite nasty with respect to
the first line, though. So we'd need to make wrap() smarter, at least
understanding about a leading tab's width...
guenther
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
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; }}}
