Re: TODO idea:

[Scott Blachowicz <scott@apple.statsci.com>]

>>>>> "Wes" == Wesley Hardaker <whardake@sphysdec1.unil.ch>
 Scott> Let's say instead that you read article 18 instead of 17.  Then
 Scott> you end up with an unseen seq of 8,16,17 and when you do your
 Scott> 'inc', you end up with a new article 18 (instead of 19).
 Wes> You forgot to mention you deleted 18 also, not just read it.
True, but I was thinking that while writing - does that count? :-))

 Wes> However, my general thoughts on this is that if you do a mh 'inc', you
 Wes> should simply never do a mh 'rmm last'.  Period.

I wonder how hard it would be to get mh/nmh to use different methods to
decide what a new message is to be numbered...

1) add a "lastused" sequence to .mh_sequence that it updates and uses to
   determined what the next message is to be called.

2) add checks to prevent 'rmm' from really deleting the 'last' message?
   Maybe just truncate the file? Or rename it to some special name
   (e.g. "=383" instead of ",383"), then it's existence could be used as a
   marker similar to that "lastused" sequence?

I think I like #1 better.

Scott Blachowicz  Ph: 206/283-8802x240   Mathsoft (Data Analysis Products Div)
                                         1700 Westlake Ave N #500
scott@statsci.com                        Seattle, WA USA   98109
Scott.Blachowicz@seaslug.org