Jakob Hirsch <jh@???> (Sa 12 Jun 2010 11:57:38 CEST): > On 11.06.2010 15:57, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
>
> > Probable we only need to compute the hash if we see a reference to this
> > variable in the current config file. Is there any chance (inside the
> > code writing the message to the spool) to "peek" if there is some
> > reference to $message_size_body_hash?
>
> Such functionality is not necessary. You could just make it an expansion
> operator insted of variable. That would also give you the ability to
> include arbitrary strings (such as message headers) in the hash, e.g.
> with ${message_hash:$h_From:\n$h_Subject:\n}, which could return From,
> Subject and body.
My idea was that *if* there is any reference to $message_hash_sha1 in
the config, the process writing to the spool (and probably already
counting the zeroes) could calculate the hash "on the fly).
If there would be an expansion operator, I'd suppose, that in the event
the operator is used, the message has to be read back from the spool, if
*using* the operator should trigger computing the message hash. Or it
could use an already "precomputed" hash of the body, just extending it
with the data from some headers. Bat this again raises my question, if
(for avoiding unnessesary computation) some way exists, to know in
advance if we will need this value.
