From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/22122 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Hans de Graaff Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: nnmail-split-header-length-limit is EVIL! Date: 29 Mar 1999 22:20:06 +0200 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <8790cgf3pl.fsf@graaff.xs4all.nl> References: <87sobotazh.fsf@pc-hrvoje.srce.hr> <87u2vxfn00.fsf@pc-hrvoje.srce.hr> <87k8whq4kx.fsf@pc-hrvoje.srce.hr> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035160100 26501 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 00:28:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:28:20 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from farabi.math.uh.edu (farabi.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.57]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA07938 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 15:24:51 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by farabi.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAB00317; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 14:24:17 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 29 Mar 1999 14:24:28 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA26153 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 14:24:18 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from graaff.xs4all.nl (qmailr@graaff.xs4all.nl [194.109.62.76]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA07915 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 15:24:05 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (qmail 4188 invoked by uid 1000); 29 Mar 1999 20:20:08 -0000 Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: ,i^c$X{l+r}VV%(bl{^[ writes: > Hrvoje Niksic writes: > > > Because there is no clearly defined "regexp error". At least I recall > > you mentioning regexps that take hours to match, or something like > > that. > > Oh, I had forgotten that. Yes, there were two problems with the long > lines -- the regexp could either overflow, or it could just take > forever to run. I've now reverted to removing the lines again. :-( I agree with Hrvoje that the latter behavior is evil. Could there not be some kind of time-out mechanism which would abort a regexp after a given period of time and cause a regexp error which could be trapped? Setting this to 10 or 15 seconds would be quite acceptable, I think. Hans