Re: some input on sieve-00

[kjj@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

Ned Freed <Ned.Freed@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> 0.2 - Open Issues.
>
>> I'm curious why "fileinto" is being considered for moving into a separate
>> document.  Maybe I missed an earlier thread on this.
>
>"fileinto" needs to be a separate, optional facility becase many
>implementations will not be able to support it. It also isn't something that's
>going to be at all easy to write a security analysis of (something the IETF has
>gotten a lot pickier about lately).

Ah.
That makes sense.

>> It might also be nice for users to not have to use quotes around words that
>> don't need them.

>This is highly problematic, for the simple reason that it may have a very
>adverse effect on future extensibility. The ability to distinguish between a
>string argument and, say, a function that returns a string, is crucial if we
>want to keep the parser implementable with single-token lookahead and the
>language backwards-compatible.

>And what happens if I want to add a function bart to the language?

Suggestion withdrawn.
-- 
thx,
kjj