Re: Completely removing an article from drafts?

[Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com>]

Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes:

> Karl Kleinpaste <k@charcoal.com> writes:
>
>> Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes:
>>> Since `gnus-summary-delete-article' does actual expiry, I think
>>> that it would be more clear if "expire" appeared in the function name.
>>
>> No, I don't agree.  "Expiry" in Gnus is generally a time-based
>> concept; an article expires after a timeout passes, causing deletion.
>>
>> gnus-summary-delete-article simply deletes, right now.  It does not
>> expire anything; it annihilates something on the spot.  For "delete,"
>> dictionary.reference.com says "To remove by striking out or
>> canceling", and that's what the function does.
>>
>> I think it is named exactly right.
>
> If we are to adhere to that dictionary definition, then the other
> functions with "delete" in their names should then have a name change.
> They should then contain the string "mark-for-deletion" or some such
> thing, since those functions do not delete articles in the way that the
> dictionary specifies.

Also, I want to add that `gnus-summary-delete-article' does not delete
an article using the dictionary definition of "delete" that you mention
above.  Check the documentation and the source code.  What that function
actually does is to expire the article, in the exact manner that Gnus
defines "expire".

What `gnus-summary-delete-article' actually does is to apply
`nnimap-expiry-function' to the article.  If `nnimap-expiry-function' is
set to 'delete, then `gnus-summary-delete-article' will indeed do a
deletion as the expiry process that it performs.  However, if that
variable contains a function symbol, that function is invoked to perform
the expiry.

Therefore, `gnus-summary-delete-article' is indeed a misnomer for this
function, and `gnus-summary-expire-article' is the perfectly precise
name for what this function actually does.


-- 
 Lloyd Zusman
 ljz@asfast.com