Confused???

[1/6] from: edanaii:cox at: 14-Jul-2002 12:33

I've created a small program to scan emails from my inbox. It works fine until I try and remove them. Without the REMOVE command, it parses all emails in the inbox. Once I add the REMOVE command, it takes several passes to get everything cleared out. The script looks like this: Inbox: Open Load %Mailbox.r Print [ Length? Inbox "messages on server." ] ForAll Inbox [ Mail: Import-email First Inbox Print [ Index? Inbox Mail/Subject ] Remove Inbox ] close inbox The results look like this:

>> do %Test.r

5 messages on server. 1 And now, a massage from the Swedish Prime Minister! 2 She sells sea shells by the sea shore. 3 And now, for something completely different!

>> do %Test.r

2 messages on server. 1 Ask not what you can do for your country!

>> do %Test.r

1 messages on server. 1 Inna gadda davida, baby!

>> do %Test.r

0 messages on server. Even if I wait five minutes, It still does this, so it's not a latency issue. What gives? Am I missing the obvious? -- Sincerely, | The problems of two little people don't amount to Ed Dana | a hill of beans in this crazy mixed-up world! But Software Developer | this is OUR hill, and these are OUR beans! 1Ghz Athlon Amiga | -- Naked Gun via Casablanca.

[2/6] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 14-Jul-2002 14:03

Hi Ed, << I've created a small program to scan emails from my inbox. It works fine until I try and remove them. Without the REMOVE command, it parses all emails in the inbox. Once I add the REMOVE command, it takes several passes to get everything cleared out. >> It's a combination of FORALL and REMOVE that's trippnig you up. FORALL steps through the series (you can see the source for it BTW. It's a mezzanine) using NEXT and REMOVE returns the series at the location *after* the remove, so you're skipping every other element when you combine them.

>> b: [1 2 3 4 5 6]

== [1 2 3 4 5 6]

>> forall b [print first b remove b]

1 3 5 HTH! --Gregg

[3/6] from: edanaii:cox at: 14-Jul-2002 13:47

Gregg Irwin wrote:

>Hi Ed, >It's a combination of FORALL and REMOVE that's trippnig you up. FORALL steps

<<quoted lines omitted: 10>>

>5 >HTH!

Well it kinda helps. It tell's me why. But it don't tell me how to fix the problem. :) So what do you recomment I use to parse a mailbox if not ForAll? ForEach won't work, unless I'm using it wrong. Which is quite possible. -- Sincerely, | Tell me, tell me, where I'm going; I don't know Ed Dana | where I've been. Tell me, tell me. Oh won't you Software Developer | tell me, and then tell me again! My body's aching, 1Ghz Athlon Amiga | my heart is breaking and I don't know where to go! | So tell me, tell me, why don't you tell me? I just | gotta know! - Styx, Crystal Ball

[4/6] from: nitsch-lists::netcologne::de at: 14-Jul-2002 23:05

Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2002 21:33 schrieb Ed Dana:

> I've created a small program to scan emails from my inbox. It works > fine until I try and remove them. Without the REMOVE command, it parses

<<quoted lines omitted: 8>>

> Remove Inbox > ]

(not tested) while[not empty? Inbox] [ Mail: Import-email First Inbox Print [ Index? Inbox Mail/Subject ] Remove Inbox ] if you don't want to remove everything while[not empty? series][ either i-want-to-keep-it[ series: next series ][ remove series ] ]

> close inbox > The results look like this:

<<quoted lines omitted: 14>>

> issue. > What gives? Am I missing the obvious?

-Volker

[5/6] from: edanaii:cox at: 14-Jul-2002 14:46

Volker Nitsch wrote:

>(not tested) > while[not empty? Inbox] [

<<quoted lines omitted: 10>>

> ] > ]

That did the trick! Thanks Volker. I forgot all about the while loop. But I guess that's what happens when you only get to spend about an hour a week on a new language. :) -- Sincerely, | Ed Dana | Courage is fear holding on a minute longer. Software Developer | -- General George S. Patton 1Ghz Athlon Amiga |

[6/6] from: carl:cybercraft at: 15-Jul-2002 9:37

On 15-Jul-02, Ed Dana wrote:

> Gregg Irwin wrote: >> Hi Ed,

<<quoted lines omitted: 17>>

> ForEach won't work, unless I'm using it wrong. Which is quite > possible.

You could perhaps use while instead...

>> b: [1 2 3 4 5 6]

== [1 2 3 4 5 6]

>> while [not empty? b][print first b remove b]

1 2 3 4 5 6 == [] -- Carl Read

Notes

Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted