Re: 'Not metoo' feature

[Ben Schmidt <mail_ben_schmidt@yahoo.com.au>]

On 22/01/10 3:56 AM, Morten Shearman Kirkegaard wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-01-14 at 16:00 +1100, Ben Schmidt wrote:
>> I think to do this properly somehow the idea of per-subscriber options
>> needs to be given to mlmmj, and that's both a sizeable job, and a bit
>> of an upheaval to current practice. Perhaps something to consider long
>> term.
>
> A word of warning; I am a tiny bit conservative ;-)

Understood! I will devote my mind to how these kinds of things could be
done as 'unintrusively' as possible and discuss before doing any serious
work.

>> I've pretty much finished my survey of things I'd like/find useful in
>> mlmmj now, and everything else is easier than the stuff mentioned in
>> this email. I'll raise the issues over time in new threads and hopefully
>> help make some patches.
>
> I like that attitude! I hope to see some patches from you :-)

Cheers! Well, I've made a little start now, and at least two patches
have been sent to the list for consideration!

I really like the coding style of mlmmj, by the way. Being visually
impaired, I love code which isn't full of blank lines, and lines
containing only braces, or excessive comments. The code in mlmmj is nice
and compact, and although comments are sparse, they are often there
where necessary, and it's fairly straightforward to deduce the purpose
and intent of the code.

Smiles,

Ben.