------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1062
--- Comment #6 from Andrey N. Oktyabrski <ano@???> 2011-01-13 12:33:06 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > What you think about the configuration option "acl_recursion_depth" with
> > hardcoded maximum value 200 and default 20? I can made this patch if it
> > pointful.
>
> That was suggested as an alternative in the original discussion of this idea,
> but a patch was not forthcoming.
>
> In my opinion this is potentially a good solution *as long as* no other
> maintainers object.
When I can start to write the new patch? How I would know about "no other
maintainers object"? Will you let me know about it?
> If implemented we should document it in the spec but _not_ include it in any
> way in the default configuration file. There are already many ways new users
> can shoot themselves below the kneew, we should not be encouraging them to put
> the barrel against their temple :)
Exactly so! I agree with it.
> > Not all things can be made by the ${reduce ...}
> > How can I iterate through, for example, ${lookup dnsdb ...} result? Or
> > $recipients list?
> > I would not use recursion if something same as "while" cycle exists. But in
> > exim configuration I have not any cycle operator.
>
> Those operators would be:
>
> forall{<a list>}{<a condition>}
> forany{<a list>}{<a condition>}
>
> http://www.exim.org/exim-html-current/doc/html/spec_html/ch11.html
I know about these operators. But I can not to repeat the "block". If I need to
do more then one operation in turn, I must use ACL recursion now.
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
