From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New mail-related routines Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:51:55 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200410182157.i9ILvjln000739@oak.pohoyda.family> <87wtxn89vf.fsf@oak.pohoyda.family> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1098190427 32454 80.91.229.6 (19 Oct 2004 12:53:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 19 14:53:42 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CJtUk-0000SA-00 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:53:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CJtc5-0003En-Hz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:01:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CJtav-0003Bw-8i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:00:05 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CJtas-0003Ab-2G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:00:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CJtar-00039j-BO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:00:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [132.204.24.67] (helo=mercure.iro.umontreal.ca) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CJtT5-00043F-GA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:51:59 -0400 Original-Received: from hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.50]) by mercure.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1C88282EF; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:51:59 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from asado.iro.umontreal.ca (asado.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.24.84]) by hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0E5D4AC765; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:51:55 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: by asado.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 8F8258CA23; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:51:55 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: Alexander Pohoyda In-Reply-To: <87wtxn89vf.fsf@oak.pohoyda.family> (Alexander Pohoyda's message of "19 Oct 2004 09:06:44 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-DIRO-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-DIRO-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-DIRO-MailScanner-SpamCheck: n'est pas un polluriel, SpamAssassin (score=0, requis 5) X-MailScanner-From: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:28600 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:28600 >> > + (point) >> > + ;; TODO: Shouldn't we return nil instead? >> > + (message "This entity has no body") >> > + to))))) >> >> I'd argue we should return `to' because the whole thing is the header. > Sorry, I don't clearly understand you here. > Do you agree with returning `to'? Yes I agree. I was arguing against the "TODO" comment. Stefan