From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
To: 5692@debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
Subject: bug#5692: rfc822-addresses returns a string on occasion
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:51:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ociz3d2g.fsf@escher.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m2zl2k8243.fsf@igel.home> (Andreas Schwab's message of "Sun, 07 Mar 2010 18:37:16 +0100")
On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 18:37:16 +0100 Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Uday S Reddy <u.s.reddy@cs.bham.ac.uk> writes:
>
>> (rfc822-addresses "foo:;@bar")
>> "(Unparsable address -- Strange character \\@ found: \"@_^_bar\")"
>
> Thanks, I've checked in a fix.
>
> Andreas.
Your fix in effect reverts a change I submitted to deal with bug#453. I
wrote in that thread: "I'm not even sure what TRT is here: as I wrote in
my OP, my patch returns an error string as specified by
rfc822-bad-address, but the caller bbdb-rfc822-addresses expects a list,
so it still raises a wrong-type error. This happens when the relocated
catch sexp has scope to the end of the let that immediately encloses it
(patch (i) below). But [if] I leave the catch in its existing position
and move rfc822-nuke-whitespace to within it (patch (ii) below), then no
error is raised, but also there's no indication of a bad address; yet
stepping through the code with edebug does pass through
rfc822-bad-address. So where should the catch be located? Hopefully
someone familiar (unlike me) with RFC 822 and rfc822.el, and ideally
also bbdb-rfc822-addresses, can answer that question and say whether
either of these patches is suitable, or provide a better one." Chong
Yidong decided that giving the catch wide scope was the correct fix and
installed it. Your patch undoes that (even moves the catch lower than
it was before my patch), making it possible for bug#453 to occur again.
But again, I don't know what the best fix is.
Steve Berman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-07 23:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-07 15:24 bug#5692: rfc822-addresses returns a string on occasion Uday S Reddy
2010-03-07 17:37 ` Andreas Schwab
2010-03-07 23:51 ` Stephen Berman [this message]
2010-03-08 16:18 ` Chong Yidong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87ociz3d2g.fsf@escher.home \
--to=stephen.berman@gmx.net \
--cc=5692@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=schwab@linux-m68k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.