Re: [bug] Mark limit score

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

Frank Schmitt <usereplyto@Frank-Schmitt.net> writes:

> Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>  
>>Note how the argument is not optional anymore (callers can supply
>>gnus-summary-default-score if they like) and how the N spec for
>>interactive uses the prefix arg, if supplied, but prompts for a number
>>if no prefix arg is supplied.
> 
> This looks great.

Done.

> BTW: How about an (additional) enhanced function which limits to
> articles with a score within %small and %big (we need to ask the user
> for %small and %big of course.)

We accept patches :-)

> One more thought: I heard several reports that people don't understand
> from the name what Mark limit actually does. I too think that the name
> could be improved.
> 
> How about "Filter articles" instead of "Mark limit"?

Well, `filter articles' could mean the same as splitting, or it could
mean the same as limiting.

The `mark' part still needs to be there, for `limit to marks' means to
limit, well, to specific marks that the user can enter.  For example,
the R mark, or the E mark.

Or are you talking about something other than `/ m'?

kai
-- 
Lisp is kinda like tpircstsoP