Re: [Nmh-workers] Items for nmh 1.7

[norm]

Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> writes:

>>I like the basic idea. I like it a lot. But the new mhl would be
>>sufficiently different that it should have a new name, to avoid backward
>>compatibility constraints.
>
>I believe the mhl configuration file is sufficiently expandable enough so
>that we can continue to use it as-is. Although .... I guess my question to
>you would be, if we had a new mhl-like program that was MIME-aware, why would
>you want to keep the old mhl around?

mhl has baggage that I don't believe that -- nor do I believe that you believe
-- the new program (call it mhmime) should have. Examples are the output and
terminal related stuff, -bell, -clear, -length, -width, -moreproc, which have
nothing to do with parsing mime stuff.

I think you should be able to design and write the new program unencumbered by
the encrustations of the past. Of course, if in in writing the new code, you
want to copy some of the mhl code, the ghost of Dijkstra will forgive you.

The same goes for, show, mhshow, next and prev. They should go into nmh-1.7
pretty much as is, but deprecated, and be absent from nmh-1.8.

    Norman Shapiro