From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/22264 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: 03 Apr 1999 09:00:29 +0200 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <87soaidw8i.fsf@graaff.xs4all.nl> References: <87sobotazh.fsf@pc-hrvoje.srce.hr> <87u2vxfn00.fsf@pc-hrvoje.srce.hr> <87k8whq4kx.fsf@pc-hrvoje.srce.hr> <8790cgf3pl.fsf@graaff.xs4all.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035160217 28389 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 00:30:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:30:17 +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 BAA11224 for ; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 01:45:04 -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 AAB19897; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 00:41:00 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sun, 04 Apr 1999 00:41:18 -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 AAA20761 for ; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 00:41:08 -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 BAA11121 for ; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 01:40:47 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (qmail 1549 invoked by uid 1000); 3 Apr 1999 07:00:29 -0000 Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: ,i^c$X{l+r}VV%(bl{^[ writes: > > 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? > > Hm. Sounds too complicated, I think. I know just enough lisp to get Gnus to do what I want, so I'm not sure how practical this would be, but could you not to the regexp matching in an asynchronous subprocess, and then either use the result if not too much time has passed, and otherwise delete the process and move on with an error? Hans