From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/9778
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: David Moore <dmoore@UCSD.EDU>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: nnmail-split-it
Date: 03 Feb 1997 15:28:08 -0800
Sender: dmoore@sdnp5.ucsd.edu
Message-ID: <rvraixqxkn.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
References: <xofiv4aual5.fsf@blubb.pdc.kth.se>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035149749 20468 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:35:49 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:35:49 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <ding-request@ifi.uio.no>
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2])
	by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA10969
	for <steve@miranova.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 15:38:54 -0800
Original-Received: from UCSD.EDU (mailbox1.ucsd.edu [132.239.1.53]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <AAA12792@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 00:25:32 +0100
Original-Received: from sdnp5.ucsd.edu (sdnp5.ucsd.edu [132.239.79.10]) by UCSD.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA04281 for <ding@ifi.uio.no>; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 15:25:21 -0800 (PST)
Original-Received: by sdnp5.ucsd.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id PAA28410; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 15:28:09 -0800
Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no
X-Face: "oX;zS#-JU$-,WKSzG.1gGE]x^cIg!hW.dq>.f6pzS^A+(k!T|M:}5{_%>Io<>L&{hO7W4cicOQ|>/lZ1G(m%7iaCf,6Qgk0%%Bz7b2-W3jd0m_UG\Y;?]}4s0O-U)uox>P3JN)9cm]O\@,vy2e{`3pb!"pqmRy3peB90*2L
Mail-Copies-To: never
In-Reply-To: joda@pdc.kth.se's message of 02 Feb 1997 23:06:30 +0100
Original-Lines: 28
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.8/XEmacs 19.15
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9778
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9778

joda@pdc.kth.se (Johan Danielsson) writes:

> Nnmail-split-it is currently using re-search-backward, this fails with
> splits like this:
> 
> ("sender" "\\(.*\\)@foo.org" "foo-\\1")
> 
> What will searching forward break?

	If there are multiple headers which match, it'll get the earlier
ones rather than the latter ones.  The problem in this case however is
the two competing .*'s in the regexp.  A better fix is probably just
make the innermost regexp-search-backwards into a forwards, not both of
them.

	And a much better fix would be to preparse the message headers,
to allow much faster comparisons, as it's really slow currently with
lots of split rules.  Something like making a list of header names to
the start/end points of that header's value in the buffer might be
good.  Then you just do string-match of the field designator to each
thing in the list, and the first one which matches, you apply the value
regexp to the buffer limited to the start/end region.

-- 
David Moore <dmoore@ucsd.edu>       | Computer Systems Lab      __o
UCSD Dept. Computer Science - 0114  | Work: (619) 534-8604    _ \<,_
La Jolla, CA 92093-0114             | Fax:  (619) 534-1445   (_)/ (_)
<URL:http://oj.egbt.org/dmoore/>    | In a cloud bones of steel.