>== Auszüge aus der Nachricht von Gaute Hope vom 2014-11-14 11:13: > got a few comments below [btw: it is better to send a completely new > patch with your changes squashed together than to send incremental > changes to the first patch]. I still have to master this "stupid content tracker". Hope to figure it out. > > Sup is a curses-based email client. > > > > Usage: > > - sup [options] > > + sup [options] [to-address] > > + > > +Arguments: > > + to-address: Compose message to this recipient upon startup > > + --compose overrides an address passed as argument > > ^^ i think it would be better to fail if --compose is specified in addition to > an unnamed argument, what happens if i want to specify many addresses? > what do you think? I had trouble to figure out how --compose works. As far as I found out by now it accepts exact ONE argument, which might be a string containing a list of well formatted email addresses. No checks are done, sup --compose "This is all a terrible nonsense" will happily compose an email with a "To: This is all a terrible nonsense" header. Thus I think I could just add the arguments to compose and ARGV.join(' '), check this combined address list with RMail::Address.parse, inform the user if the mails are not well formed, and pass the list happily to the existing code This way the option --compose and any command arguments would work seamlessly together. What do you think? > > > > +## Trollop does no command argument parsing, only option parsing. > > +# After Trollop parsing, ARGV contains only the +rest+ of the command line, > > +# thus the arguments to our program > > +## compose message if we have an email address as first command line argument > > add '.' sorry, yes > , why different levels of '#' ? a habit I took from lisp and bash, somehow feels like structuring comments and code > try to stay at approx 80 > char width. I do like Python, my vim is set to tw=80 for all of my work. Well, usually. Yours, Ruthard -- Please encrypt and sign emails. My PGP-Id: AC5AC6C2