Modularity

[David Relson]

At 08:26 PM 1/12/03, Adriano Nagelschmidt Rodrigues wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I was reading the bogofilter man page, and it just crossed my mind that a
>single executable is doing too many things. I wonder if splitting basic
>functionality into different binaries wouldn't be a good thing.
>
>Motivation: when you use one of the [nNsS] switches, there's no sense in
>using an algorithm selection switch (eg -f). Right?
>
>So, to avoid complexity building up, there could be something like this:
>
>bogoclass [-s] [-S] [-n] [-N]
>bogotest  [-g] [-r] [-f] [-l]
>bogolearn # a wrapper that does (bogotest ? bogoclass -s : bogoclass -n)
>
>Regards,

Adriano,

You're an unusual fellow.  Many people try to use software without reading 
the documentation.  Clearly you're not one of that group.  This is good.

What you say about using "sSnN" and "grfl" is mostly true.  'l' can be used 
with "sSnN" to keep a record of wordlist changes.  Also, there's the "-u" 
switch, which torpedoes your idea, I'm sorry to say.

I'll let you keep reading and learning.

David

P.S.  I run bogofilter using "-p -u -l -e -v" (from procmail and postfix).