Re: PATCH: Unbreak `mailcap-mailcap-entry-passes-test'

[Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org>]

Michael Sperber <sperber@deinprogramm.de> wrote:
> Right.  However, many typical mailcap entries will not have a test
> clause.

Yes.  Moreover mailcap-mailcap-entry-passes-test seems to
support only `test -n $DISPLAY' and `test -z $DISPLAY'.

>> If your patch is applied, the `test' token will not be updated
>> whatever $DISPLAY is.

> I don't think so:

> If there's a test clause present, the same code as before runs -
> mutating the cdr as before.

> If not, the function simply returns t, as documented.  (In that case,
> there's nothing to mutate.)

I did misread the patched code, sorry.

> +    (or (not test)
> +	(progn
> 	  ...))

In the case `test' is nil, there is no `test' to be updated.
So, the patch is harmless, but it isn't necessarily worthwhile
except that it makes it a bit fast, I think.  In addition,

> * mailcap.el (mailcap-mailcap-entry-passes-test): Actually return
> non-nil if no test clause is present, as documented.

Actually the return value of the function is not used in at least
Gnus Lisp modules.

Regards,