david@wubios.wustl.edu (David J. Camp) (10/15/90)
I have started using 'Message Subject' and 'Reverse Message Subject'
sorting order. It does as expected, and groups messages with the
same subject together. I would like to request a small change in
the sorting algorithm. I ask that when using the non-reversed
mode, that the messages within a group appear in Mailbox Order, and
reverse this when using Reverse Message Subject order. That would
allow me to use Reverse Message Subject order to read messages
with similiar subjects, with the latest posting first. It would
also allow people who like a cronological treatment to read them
in the order posted.
The current algorithm shuffles them into an arbitrary sequence,
which clearly has no advantage. -David-
david@wubios.wustl.edu ^ Mr. David J. Camp
david%wubios@wugate.wustl.edu < * > +1 314 382 0584
...!uunet!wugate!wubios!david v
"White light makes me stupid."hbergh@oracle.nl (Herbert van den Bergh) (10/16/90)
In article <1990Oct15.081235.6891@wubios.wustl.edu> david@wubios.wustl.edu (David J. Camp) writes: >I have started using 'Message Subject' and 'Reverse Message Subject' >sorting order. It does as expected, and groups messages with the >same subject together. I would like to request a small change in >the sorting algorithm. I ask that when using the non-reversed >mode, that the messages within a group appear in Mailbox Order, and >reverse this when using Reverse Message Subject order. That would >allow me to use Reverse Message Subject order to read messages >with similiar subjects, with the latest posting first. It would >also allow people who like a cronological treatment to read them >in the order posted. > >The current algorithm shuffles them into an arbitrary sequence, >which clearly has no advantage. -David- > >david@wubios.wustl.edu ^ Mr. David J. Camp >david%wubios@wugate.wustl.edu < * > +1 314 382 0584 >...!uunet!wugate!wubios!david v > "White light makes me stupid." Below is a change I made to sort.c to fix the problem you descibe. The part in the #ifdef is just a copy of the sort on time code. Hope this helps. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- case SUBJECT: /* need some extra work 'cause of STATIC buffers */ strcpy(from1, skip_re(shift_lower(first->subject))); ret = strcmp(from1, skip_re(shift_lower(second->subject))); #ifdef HBERGH if (ret == 0){ /* equal subjects, sort on date sent */ diff = first->time_sent - second->time_sent; if ( diff < 0 ) ret = -1; else if ( diff > 0 ) ret = 1; else ret = 0; } #endif /* HBERGH */ break; ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Herbert van den Bergh, Email: hbergh@oracle.nl, hbergh@oracle.com ORACLE Europe
indra@ashirvad.amd.com (Indra Singhal) (10/17/90)
david@wubios.wustl.edu (David J. Camp) writes: >I would like to request a small change in >the sorting algorithm. I ask that when using the non-reversed >mode, that the messages within a group appear in Mailbox Order, and >reverse this when using Reverse Message Subject order. I agree with David. This would make Message Subject sorting very useful. I would then not have to context switch while clearing my mailbox between subjects and also be able to maintain chronological sequence within a subject. -- iNDRA | indra@amd.com or {ames apple uunet}!amd!indra | (Indra Singhal) (408) 749-5445; Advanced Micro Devices | MS 167; Box 3453; 901, Thompson Pl., Sunnyvale, CA 94088
phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) (10/17/90)
In article <1990Oct16.180718.8173@amd.com> indra@ashirvad.amd.com (Indra Singhal) writes: >david@wubios.wustl.edu (David J. Camp) writes: > >>I would like to request a small change in >>the sorting algorithm. I ask that when using the non-reversed >>mode, that the messages within a group appear in Mailbox Order, and >>reverse this when using Reverse Message Subject order. > >I agree with David. This would make Message Subject sorting very useful. Actually, I think that this is an instance of a deficit in all of the sorting orders - that if there is a tie in the key, the ordering of the tied messages is haphazard. I use Reverse time received and am continually annoyed when the notebook is resorted that the order of existing items changes :-( What I would like to suggest as a general approach would be to use notebook order as a secondary key. Use the same order as for the primary key - i.e. either increasing or decreasing as the case for the primary key. An alternative would be to use the order from the previous sort. This would mean, for example, that you could first sort on decreasing time received and then increasing subject and get what you (perhaps) wanted. -phil -- J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617 uunet!wuarchive!wubios!phil - UUCP (314)362-2693(FAX) C90562JM@WUVMD - bitnet