Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
>
> From: Amos Gouaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 09:01:15 -0600
> [...]
> I believe there is activity going on at CMU to create a byte
> compiler for Sieve scripts. Perhaps that will be a bit more verbose
> about script errors.
>
> We currently use yacc (or bison) to parse Sieve scripts; the bytecode
> work isn't currently expected to change this. We basically report the
> parse errors that Yacc gives us.
it often does report it but not always. and test program ignores them!
> It was initially anticipated that the majority of Sieve scripts would
> be generated by some other program, and thus errors would be kept to a
> minimum.
that doesn't make any sense:
1. lot of people would edit files (just like they edit procmail
recipes or other mail filters)
2. if sieve does not have good error reporting then how do you debug
the programs that generate sieve files?
getting the information from cyrus (what's going on, errors etc.) is
the worst part of cyrus, that's not only my opinion, all other people
that I discussed the configuration of cyrus had the same problems.
note that this is NOT a documentation problem, docs could be better as
well but they are generally fairly OK, this is the problem of programs
reporting their status.
I'd be willing to add some error messages at least in sieve (that's
were it's needed most, IMO), how's the policy on accepting patches?
erik
