On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 07:15, Ãvar ArnfjÃrà Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 07:05, Stephen Boyd <bebarino@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If the first patch in a series has a To: header in the file and the
>> second patch in the series doesn't the address from the first patch will
>> be part of the To: addresses in the second patch. Fix this by treating the
>> to list like the cc list. Have an initial to list come from the command
>> line, user input and config options. Then build up a to list from each
>> patch and concatenate the two together before sending the patch. Finally,
>> reset the list after sending each patch so the To: headers from a patch
>> don't get used for the next one.
>
> Couldn't this whole thing be done by:
>
>> Â# Variables we fill in automatically, or via prompting:
>> -my (@to,$no_to,@cc,$no_cc,@initial_cc,@bcclist,$no_bcc,@xh,
>> +my (@to,$no_to,@initial_to,@cc,$no_cc,@initial_cc,@bcclist,$no_bcc,@xh,
>
> Changing this to an "our" variable instead of a "my".
>
>> Â Â Â Âmy $body_encoding;
>> + Â Â Â @to = ();
>
> Then doing:
>
> Â Âlocal @to = @to;
>
>> + Â Â Â @to = (@initial_to, @to);
>> Â Â Â Â@cc = (@initial_cc, @cc);
Small brainfart, you don't have to change it to an "our" and use
"local", you can just use "my" in that for-loop:
$ perl -E 'my @a = qw(a b); { my @a = (@a, "c"); say "@a" } say "@a"'
a b c
a b
That's a much better solution IMO than the C-like usage of two
variables. Lexical shadowing is exactly for this sort of thing.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html