From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9EB96DE0E75 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 22:11:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RZ_wKh-AUcBz for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 22:11:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2A4F6DE0C6D for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 22:11:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gaaVf-0008Bu-1R; Sat, 22 Dec 2018 01:11:39 -0500 Received: (nullmailer pid 28845 invoked by uid 1000); Sat, 22 Dec 2018 06:11:30 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Dirk Van Haerenborgh Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org, Carl Worth Subject: Re: Pointer ownership In-Reply-To: References: <87imzt9hvw.fsf@tethera.net> Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2018 15:11:30 +0900 Message-ID: <87zhsyytt9.fsf@tethera.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2018 06:11:48 -0000 Dirk Van Haerenborgh writes: > Thanks. > > For the most part, that's what I ended up with, but the thread 'stealing' a > message will be quite hard to implement in Rust, I guess. > When using notmuch_query_search_messages, I was assuming the resulting > individual messages to be owned by the query. > So, if at a later point in time, one uses notmuch_query_search_threads, > will the ownership of a previous message abruptly be > transferred from query to thread? > I do want to be able to run *_destroy at some point :) It's still (transitively) owned by the query in that case, since the threads are owned by the query. d