Re: Splitting on mail contents? (using spam-stat.el)

[Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann)]

Oystein Viggen <oysteivi@tihlde.org> writes:

> * [Kai Großjohann] 
>
>> Regular splitting can't run functions, I think.
>
> You're wrong there.  From C-h v nnmail-split-methods:
> ,----
> | The second element can also be a function.  In that case, it will be
> | called narrowed to the headers with the first element of the rule as
> | the argument.  It should return a non-nil value if it thinks that the
> | mail belongs in that group.
> `----
>
> I've tested this, and the function is called as specified.

OK, sorry, then.

>> I suggest that you switch to fancy splitting.
>
> Maybe I should, but can functions called from fancy splitting easily
> access the whole article?  It seems I would want to use (: FUNCTION),
> but according to the documentation, this function will be called "in the
> buffer containing the message headers".
>
> I see that spam-stat-split-fancy uses gnus-original-article-buffer.
> Does nnmail-split-fancy perhaps store the article in this buffer when
> splitting?  I'll have to investigate that.

Well, I remember that Gnus uses two different buffers for splitting
and for `B r'.  Beware!

> My nnmail-split-methods is about 100 lines long, and uses a few home
> grown hacks in addition, so I don't want to do the big job of converting
> unless I'm pretty sure something will be gained by it :)

Maybe not...

kai
-- 
A large number of young women don't trust men with beards.  (BFBS Radio)