From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/75403 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Riley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Just shoot me now Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:57:13 +0100 Organization: aich tea tea pea dicky riley dot net Message-ID: References: <87bp4es21b.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1293026261 14755 80.91.229.12 (22 Dec 2010 13:57:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 13:57:41 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M23755@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Dec 22 14:57:37 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PVPCC-00084D-Ji for ding-account@gmane.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:57:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1PVPBx-0005Kf-0w; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 07:57:21 -0600 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1PVPBv-0005KS-LT for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 07:57:19 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PVPBu-0005yH-5F for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 07:57:19 -0600 Original-Received: from mail-bw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.214.45]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PVPBt-00024p-6d for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:57:17 +0100 Original-Received: by bwz16 with SMTP id 16so6268405bwz.32 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:57:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:organization :references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version :content-type; bh=G271q/DaJFDMK/mN4ObaLBOEP00Hvp+m75hp0gkVvRE=; b=ZJYtZ3ecL/pYrJD4ihghxUPvhzrJ7dco0akv3ooU6cbZcOJoJs2jPOo5s+4ZIvzUPq NKH7hV2JG0ZM4bwEI+XVz155UNWicoxTg8w2+H69sx3Jn5w95XZ60wB4CxPKF9F4jb2P oEuMIrWxMjdRJ73YwJVNAkOpqSjHe9F7Wm2sU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:organization:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=XxQU4c+S/XzpmQjtpK8qSBEKt7MOeU0VVl5cNznHWcZrYqEeIUiTIMcXiFzqBEIc/X rkO3nfSACpngY+b0L05TPhl+nBRQTYY+gywptzhZXYde6CqGtObSU1VXO2dIKNBvvwn7 lSLm8jgAq4wqFYFU6+kDLFq7h4XimrldEvsSY= Original-Received: by 10.204.32.206 with SMTP id e14mr5783611bkd.152.1293026236703; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:57:16 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost ([85.183.18.158]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f20sm2507095bkf.4.2010.12.22.05.57.14 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:57:15 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87bp4es21b.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> (Reiner Steib's message of "Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:24:32 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:75403 Archived-At: Reiner Steib writes: > On Wed, Dec 22 2010, Tommy Kelly wrote: > >> Andreas Schwab writes: >> >>> Because [ and ] are not word characters. See >>> nnmail-split-fancy-syntax-table. >> >> Thanks Andreas. Unfortunately that 6,500 line variable, consisting >> mostly of pairs of parens enclosing numbers, is as clear as mud :-) > [...] >> 5. Begin building more simple splits then stumble on >> "\\[stuff\\]". Splitting isn't as keen on \\[ as it is on, say, \\. . >> 6. Told that nnmail-split-fancy-syntax-table is the clue >> 7. C-h v on that variable. Look. Puke. Look again. >> 8. Google for "emacs lisp syntax table" >> 9. Fall pretty much at the first fence on being told that a syntax table >> is a "char-table" about which I know very little >> 10. Start reading about what a char-table is >> 11. Consider reading about "aref" and "aset" since part of the basic >> description of char-tables mentions those >> 12. Stop and think "Seriously!? All this Just To Split My Mail!?" > > Right, much too complicated. The solution is described in the manual: > > ,----[ (info "(gnus)Fancy Mail Splitting") ] > | Normally, VALUE in these splits must match a complete _word_ > | according to the fundamental mode syntax table. In other words, all > | VALUE's will be implicitly surrounded by `\<...\>' markers, which are > | word delimiters. Therefore, if you use the following split, for > | example, > | > | (any "joe" "joemail") > | > | messages sent from `joedavis@foo.org' will normally not be filed in > | `joemail'. If you want to alter this behavior, you can use any of the > | following three ways: > | > | 1. You can set the `nnmail-split-fancy-match-partial-words' variable > | to non-`nil' in order to ignore word boundaries and instead the > | match becomes more like a grep. This variable controls whether > | partial words are matched during fancy splitting. The default > | value is `nil'. > | > | Note that it influences all VALUE's in your split rules. > | > | 2. VALUE beginning with `.*' ignores word boundaries in front of a > | word. Similarly, if VALUE ends with `.*', word boundaries in the > | rear of a word will be ignored. For example, the VALUE > | `"@example\\.com"' does not match `foo@example.com' but > | `".*@example\\.com"' does. > | > | 3. You can set the INVERT-PARTIAL flag in your split rules of the > | `(FIELD VALUE ...)' types, aforementioned in this section. If the > | flag is set, word boundaries on both sides of a word are ignored > | even if `nnmail-split-fancy-match-partial-words' is `nil'. > | Contrarily, if the flag is set, word boundaries are not ignored > | even if `nnmail-split-fancy-match-partial-words' is non-`nil'. > | (New in Gnus 5.10.7) > `---- > > Bye, Reiner. So the question is really "why is this missed by everyone who trys splitting"? Can it be simplified? Moved? Is there an nnimap-split-fancy-match... equivalent? Point 3 is non parseable by anyone without a degree in elisp. By, R.