Re: ``Quips'' in signatures

[Richard Riley]

Joe Fineman <joe_f@verizon.net> writes:

> Richard Riley <rileyrgdev@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Why would you do all this when gnus has signatures built in which
>> use things like regexps for signature matching?
>
> Because, as I explained at the beginning,
>
>>> Being isolated from the Gnuish mainstream, I routinely reinvent the
>>> wheel when such desires arise.

Google gnus and signature file - it's not so far out :-;

>
> I do not have access to folklore, which is the only tutorial that
> exists.  In particular, I do not understand the clause "gnus has
> signatures built in".
>
>> And how would Merciadri invoke it?
>
> By keying "M-x psig RET" (after creating a congenial Sayings file, of
> course).

You don't auto call it when you send your message? Better I guess if you
only attach a .sig rarely.

>
>> Far easier to use a file based signature(s) and have gnus include
>> them.
>
> I suspect it would take me longer to find out what "file based
> signature(s)" means than to write the routine I provided, which worked
> the first time and has served me well for many years.

Well, yes, if you have one single never changing signature I can see it
might appear useful as opposed to using the built in facilities. But
obviously I would feel using built in functions which are part of gnus
would be more robust and probably easier for a newcomer. It isolates you
from knowing things like signature separator standards etc as well.