[antispam-f] Re: Next version of AntiSpam coming up
- From: "lists (ww)" <lists@xxxxxxxx>
- To: antispam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:46:13 +1200
On 14 Apr, Frank de Bruijn <antispam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <4f8f9fece7lists@xxxxxxxx>,
> lists (ww) <lists@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 13 Apr, Frank de Bruijn <antispam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Have you tried running AS with the 'Open Marking window after
> > > run' option (Choices window, Scan frame) off?
> > Thanks. Just tried that, and it's useful enough. But I'd prefer
> > Choices Scan to have the additional option 'Open Marking window
> > after fetch (or run) completed', which is what I mistakenly
> > understood by 'Open Marking window after run'.
> Not mistakenly, that's what it does. With the 'Open Marking
> window...' option set, the window won't open until the program goes
> back to 'Idle'. Provided it's closed to start with, that is. And
> then it won't open if there's nothing to mark. I find that's the
> best way to use it myself.
Hmmm. Mine opens and stays on top, even when I put it to the back,
another email box fetch will bring it forward ... etc ... till all 10
boxes are fetched.
> Depending on the 'Manipulate...' settings, it will 'jump to front'
> after each box if it's already open and close after the last one if
> there's nothing to mark. That's probably what you've been seeing.
Yes. Here's what I have set in Choices.Scan:
tick Manipulate defaulted messages after retrieval
tick manipulate diverted ...
untick Open Marking window after run.
Ahah.
Trying this:
untick Manipulate defaulted messages after retrieval
untick manipulate diverted ...
tick Open Marking window after run.
> We could easily change this behaviour so it would stay where it is,
> i.e. behind whatever you're doing. Not sure how that would be more
> useful than keeping the window closed to start with, though. After
> the last box it would still close if there was nothing to mark and
> jump to front if there was.
Thatd be fine.
> You could try this out yourself by changing all the occurrences of
> PROCshow_ID(). Add a second parameter to each of them:
No I couldn't. Sorry. Somewhat beyond me.
> Line 918 : PROCshow_ID(mCurrent%,TRUE)
> Line 955 : PROCshow_ID(mCurrent%+1+2*(bs%=1),TRUE)
> Line 1367 : PROCshow_ID(mCurrent%+N%,TRUE)
> Line 1460 : PROCshow_ID(mCurrent%,TRUE)
> Line 1509 : PROCshow_ID(TRUE,TRUE)
> Line 4720 : PROCshow_ID(mCurrent%+1,TRUE)
> Line 4851 : PROCshow_ID(FALSE,FALSE)
> Line 4854 : PROCshow_ID(FALSE,FALSE)
> Then change line 4668 so there's a second argument in the definition:
> DEF PROCshow_ID(M%,U%) <don't forget the rest of the line here...>
> And finally split line 4695 (ma%!28=TRUE : SYS &400C5,,ma%) into:
> IF U% ma%!28=TRUE
> SYS &400C5,,ma%
> Resave Source, run !Crunch, etc.
Brian
Mon, 14 Apr 08 22:45
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
--
Auckland NEW ZEALAND
Other related posts:
