From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/47380 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: gnus-agent typo? Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:20:52 -0400 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <84n0pbipvq.fsf@crybaby.cs.uni-dortmund.de> <84hefe3m48.fsf@crybaby.cs.uni-dortmund.de> <84of9l7f3h.fsf@crybaby.cs.uni-dortmund.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035386635 18635 80.91.224.249 (23 Oct 2002 15:23:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 15:23:55 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 184NMP-0004qD-00 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 17:23:53 +0200 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 184NK0-0000Ba-00; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:21:24 -0500 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:22:08 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (qmailr@sclp3.sclp.com [209.196.61.66]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA24350 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:21:57 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (qmail 23669 invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2002 15:21:06 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 23655 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2002 15:21:02 -0000 Original-Received: from multivac.student.cwru.edu (HELO multivac.cwru.edu) (@129.22.96.25) by gnus.org with SMTP; 23 Oct 2002 15:21:02 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 6863 invoked by uid 500); 23 Oct 2002 15:21:15 -0000 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <84of9l7f3h.fsf@crybaby.cs.uni-dortmund.de> (kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de's message of "Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:07:46 +0200") Mail-Copies-To: nobody Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) Emacs/21.2 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:47380 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:47380 kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de (Kai Gro=DFjohann) wrote: > No, the original logic took a list of articles and then _added_ > marked ones, except that it didn't add seen or recent ones. > > Maybe that's the best solution. You guessed that the original logic was buggy, and I guess the same, because it seems odd to treat seen and recent articles similarly. (Could someone who knows what that code is really supposed to do comment here?) We would expect *un*seen and recent articles to be treated similarly, since they're semantically similar - but since they're implemented differently (recent is a normal mark; unseen is the lack of the seen mark), the code should look different than it does now. So to fix the apparent bug, but otherwise produce the same range, we should take the initial list of article and add (seen - recent). (This is different from ((initial + seen) - recent).) paul