Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:

> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>
>> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>>> The registry has ERT tests, which I thought covered this case.  Can you
>>> look at `tests/gnustest-registry.el'?  As a first step, can you try
>>> making tests to demonstrate the problems?
>>
>> Will do.
>
> Okay, turns out there were tests, but the bit that tests pruning was
> commented out :)
>
> This is the first in a (gradual) series of patches. It does very little
> except:
>
> 1. Adjust `registry-prune' to do what the docstring says: return the
> total number of entries pruned
>
> 2. Uncomment the pruning test and adjust it so it correctly catches the
> number of pruned entries.
>
> Test should fail. Over the next couple of days I'll add another test to
> check that entries are sorted correctly before pruning, and then take a
> stab at fixing the pruning itself.

Okay I realized it didn't make too much sense to patch gnus just to make
it fail, so here's a complete patch, with passing tests, that preserves
precious entries when pruning. I haven't done the sorting yet, that will
be a separate patch.

My main realization when working on this is that the distinction between
max-soft and max-hard is confusing, and possibly unnecessary. Do we
really need both? If, as I suspect, most users set one but not the
other, then there's no point in having both. Is anyone really setting
two different values for `gnus-registry-max-entries' and
`gnus-registry-max-pruned-entries'? And why?

Eric