| For posterity, here's the entire discussion.
#6 <_Jym_>\
================================================================================
TURTLE""::SYS$UTILROOT:[NOTES]NOTESOLD.NOT;1
SIVA::TAYLOR Notes on NOTES 22-FEB-1984 11:38
Note 95.0 mail to author 10 responses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I miss the usenet mail reply to author. There are occasions when I want to
send a message directly to the author and not post it to the file.
reply/author reply/mail
mike
================================================================================
HARE::STAN Notes on NOTES 27-FEB-1984 00:28
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You could enter it in the file, mail it to the author,
and then delete it from the file.
================================================================================
RANI::LEICHTERJ Notes on NOTES 27-FEB-1984 19:30
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This note should be saved, to be shown to anyone who wants to know the proper
definitions of "hack" and "hacker".
Way to go, Stan!
-- Jerry
================================================================================
VAXUUM::DYER Notes on NOTES 29-FEB-1984 15:16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, I've saved it, and I'll show it.
But isn't a better definition of `kludge'???
<_Jym_>
================================================================================
HARE::STAN Notes on NOTES 7-MAR-1984 03:23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It \does/ have the problem that if someone else enters a
response before you get to delete your temporary message,
you're screwed.
================================================================================
HARE::STAN Notes on NOTES 7-MAR-1984 03:34
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of hack
------------------
Yes, response 1 was a kludge, not a hack. Here's a hacky response:
You could do a WRITE/EDIT. When you get into TECO (your editor -
naturally), you edit your mail response. Then you do an EK to
delete the output file. This will guarantee that no response will
get entered into the notes database. Then you open as an output
file, MAIL::"recipient node address" and then exit TECO.
For this to work, you would first have to build and install a
special device driver on your system for device MAIL: which
would handle converting data sent to it into the proper network
protocol commands for talking to the remote mail server object.
[Just a small matter of programming.]
================================================================================
RANI::LEICHTERJ Notes on NOTES 8-MAR-1984 21:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As long as we are hacking...You can actually send the mail message from
inside of TECO - use the "TASK=nn" option to connect to the MAIL-11
server at the other end and talk MAIL-11 protocol. Someone has already
done this in DCL - I've got a copy (from some notesfile or other) - I
think John Covert did it.
Actually, there is another approach - set up the command file that
NOTE$EDIT points to to ask if you want to MAIL or edit. If EDIT,
then it goes into your favorite editor as always. If MAIL, it kills
the file it was asked to edit (so no note or reply get's written)
and puts you in mail.
Gee, that last might even work - I think I'll try it out and report back
here.
Of course, in both of these, you lose the automatic addressing of the
REPLY. You could SAVE the message in a file of a known name, then have the
command file - or TECO, or whatever editor you use - pick up the name and
kill the file. Etc...
-- Jerry
================================================================================
RANI::LEICHTERJ Notes on NOTES 9-MAR-1984 01:04
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, folks, hacking to the rescue. Things CAN be made to work out - as
I discovered quickly. (I put a quicky version of a command file to let
you get to MAIL earlier; I've deleted it in the interests of the following
command file, so don't be too puzzled if you was the earlier version.)
This NOTESEDT lets you get to MAIL, or even to DCL. When you edit, it
uses TECO (easy enough to change). You will note that it is not written
in DCL; it's in RCL, which is compiled into DCL. (The RCL compiler is
available from the Toolshed on METOO.) It should be pretty clear what's
going on, though - clearer than RCL's output would be!
-- Jerry
$ verify = 'f$verify(0)'
$!
$! N O T E S E D T . R C L
$!
$!EDITLEVEL=02
$!
$!+
$! NOTESEDT.RCL V1.0
$!
$! Command procedure to invoke an editor (TECO), MAIL, or DCL for NOTES.
$!
$! This procedure gets SPAWNed by NOTES when the user types WRITE/EDIT or
$! REPLY/EDIT. It prompts you with:
$!
$! Mail, DCL, or [Edit]:
$!
$! Only the first character you type is significant. If it is anything
$! except M or D (upper or lower case), the procedure puts you into your
$! editor (TECO in this version), just as the usual NOTES edit command file
$! does.
$!
$! If you type M, you will be placed in the MAIL program, which you can then
$! use in the normal way. When you exit from MAIL, you will be returned to
$! NOTES. NOTES will print an error message about a missing file, which you
$! can ignore.
$!
$! If you type D, you will be placed in DCL. You will be running in a newly-
$! spawned subprocess with your terminal acting as a command file. Because of
$! this, DCL parameter prompting won't work; everything else (including SPAWN)
$! should. When you type CTRL/Z, you will be returned to NOTES. (Typing
$! CTRL/Y also returns you to NOTES. It shouldn't, but the order in which
$! AST's are taken seems to make things come out that way.) Once again, NOTES
$! will complain about a missing file.
$!
$! When you type either M or D to the prompt, no note or reply actually ends
$! up getting written to the notesfile.
$!
$! Note that there is old code here to deal with cases such as not being
$! spawned (so logicals aren't passed), and really having a P1 input (it
$! should always be null).
$!
$! Input:
$!
$! P1 = Input file name.
$! P2 = Output file name.
$!-
$! Author: Original author unknown. Hacked up by Jerry Leichter
$!
$! Revision history
$! 0.0 ??-???-?? ??? Original MAILEDT file.
$! 0.1 ??-???-?? JSL Use TECO instead of EDT. All sorts of little
$! changes for subprocesses, too.
$! 1.0 8-Mar-84 JSL Redone in RCL. Added escapes to MAIL and DCL.
$ on control_y then goto fin !Exit cleanly on CTRL/Y
$ on error then goto fin !Exit cleanly on errors
$ inquire notes_ans "Mail, DCL, or [Edit]"
$ notes_ans = f$extract(0,1,notes_ans)
$ if notes_ans .nes. "M" .and. notes_ans .nes. "D" -
then goto edit
$ if p1 .nes. "" then delete/nolog 'p1'
$ if notes_ans .eqs. "M" -
{ $ assign/user SYS$COMMAND SYS$INPUT
$ mail
}
else
{ $ write SYS$COMMAND "Type CTRL/Z to return to NOTES"
$iloop:
$ on error then goto iloop
$ on control_Y then goto iloop
$ @'f$logical("SYS$COMMAND")'
$!Use f$logical(SYS$COMMAND) so a user's SPAWN will work
$ on error then goto fin
$ on control_Y then goto fin
}
$ goto fin
$edit:
$!
$! Change the following line to reflect the actual location of your editing
$! macro. It defines JERRY, which isn't otherwise set up for a subprocess.
$! (To be more accurate: If we are in a non-spawned subprocess, we need to
$! do this.)
$ if f$logical("JERRY") .nes. "" then goto not_subprocess
$ define JERRY USER$5:[LEICHTERJ]
$ define TEC$VTEDIT USER$5:[LEICHTERJ.TOOLS]VT52.TEC
$!
$ TECO := $SYS$SYSTEM:TECO TECO/VTEDIT
$not_subprocess:
$ assign/user SYS$COMMAND SYS$INPUT
$ if p1 .eqs. "" then p1 = "_NL:"
$ if p2 .eqs. "" then p2 = p1
$ TECO 'P2'='P1'
$fin:
$ rclcleanup
$ verify = f$verify(verify)
================================================================================
RANI::LEICHTERJ Notes on NOTES 9-MAR-1984 01:07
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking back at this: The delete/nolog 'P1' is probably a bad idea and should
be removed. (Since it isn't clear when p1 would be non-empty, it's not a good
idea to go around deleting random fles.)
-- Jerry
================================================================================
ALIEN::PETTENGILL Notes on NOTES 11-MAR-1984 02:18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stan, I'm disappointed. I would have expected something like
@:EG\$MAIL ^EQ* author/SUBJ="subject"\ @EW\^EQ*\EKEX
assuming that the original file had been killed and a new one created.
I don't know that this would work (don't hit me, Stan, but I haven't really
used TECO for years), but if I interpret NOTARY.TEC correctly, I think it
would. Or does this fall in the catagory of hack, rather than kludge?
================================================================================
RANI::LEICHTERJ Notes on NOTES 12-MAR-1984 23:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good going, MuLP! - yet ANOTHER approach. It works fine, except that the
command you want is just plain EG, not :EG.
-- Jerry
================================================================================
|