<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: stuff_all_quoted



On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:46:08PM -0400, Kyle Wheeler wrote:

Can Vim handle all of these requirements reliably? I can think of a
lot of scenarios where the user could pretty easily accidentally
cause vim to generate bogus flowed text, causing a lot of problems.
Honestly, I have given a quick try to "fo+=w" in vim, and it doesn't
really seem to do anything special.

The real fun begins when you add 'a' to your format options as well.
It's a highly convenient way to edit text that you want line-wrapped.

Weird - I thought I tried that before and it never did what I thought it
was. Seems to work now, though.

Here's another problem....
If I set $text_flowed, and UNset $stuff_all_quoted (so mutt should be
behaving like stock mutt w/ $text_flowed set), responding to a normally
quoted message like:

On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:39:58PM -0700, Will Yardley wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:38:22PM -0700, Someone Else wrote:

> > Blah blah blah blah stuff here

>  Some other text here

And some other text here

It shows up in my editor as:

On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:45:59PM -0700, Will Yardley wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:39:58PM -0700, Will Yardley wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:38:22PM -0700, Someone Else wrote:
> >> > Blah blah blah blah stuff here

>>  Some other text here

>And some other text here

Note the line that is:

>> >
instead of
>>>

Wouldn't that be a bug? That would mean that once I respond, the quoting
in the message would be all screwed up. And how can mutt really reliably
"know" when text from a non-flowed message is quoted and when it's not.
I can also imagine a situation like responding to a message with a (2
level deep) quoted, escaped "^From" - that would end up quoting
something like:

> > >From

as

>>>> From (4 levels deep)

instead of

>>> From (3 levels deep)

(I know that Mozilla / Thunderbird has had some problems kind of similar
to this in the past - it's difficult to deal with weird situations when
quoting messages that aren't format=flowed). But unfortunately, if mutt
wants to try to implement format=flowed support, I think it makes sense
for the program to try and do the best job it can at "guessing" whether
parts of a non-flowed message are quoted when quoting it.

Another weird case to deal with is quoting messages that use
non-standard quote strings (esp. super-cite style ones).

w