Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> writes: > This may be orthogonal to this series, but I don't get why we have > both notmuch_show_sanitize and notmuch_show_sanitize_all (especially > when the "all" version is not obviously a superset of the non-"all" > version!) Do you have a sense for whether these two functions could > be easily merged? Yeah, I don't really understand the reason for these two functions either. I also discovered (and deleted) another duplicate file name sanitization function elsewhere in the series, so it wouldn't surprise me if it's just collective sloppiness. > > Rather than (nearly) duplicating the regexp, does it work to pipe this > through notmuch_date_sanitize? Or do the minor differences matter? > I'll try this out. d