Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

[Paul Fox]

jerrad wrote:
 > I don't really understand how relative numbers are useful, but if
 > they are to be introduced why not use the same signifier as for
 > folders?  i.e; @
 > 
 > address@hidden = cur+2  address@hidden = cur-4
 > 
 > This could also prevent some confusion as to why we are using
 > something with a clear meaning (+) for such an odd purpose...

i'm not sure i see why '+' is an odd character to use for addition.
i'm also not sure how '@' relates to folders.  neither the mh nor
the folder man page mentions such a relationship.

but i admit:  i've thought about this quite a bit in the past, and
have never come up with syntax that was backward compatible,
meaningful, and enough faster to type than the digits themselves to be
useful.

mainly i wanted to make sure i wasn't missing some simple trick that
already exists that would accomplish what i'm looking for.  it's not
that big a deal -- i can create a wrapper of some sort to accomplish
it.

paul
=---------------------
 paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 56.8 degrees)