773867 - Match the PreferDisplayName logic of TB

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(SeaMonkey :: MailNews: Message Display, defect)

Description

[Ian Neal]

Attachment: Match the logic

When porting bug 474721 the logic of determining displayName was done differently to TB, we should probably match TB.

Comment 1

[[e-mail]]

Comment on attachment 642139 [details] [diff] [review]
Match the logic

Case 1: PreferDisplayName is false. In the old code, this allows us to get the header name, but if that turns out to be empty then we use the card name, while in the new code we always get the header name, but again if that turns out to be empty then we use the card name.
Case 2: PreferDisplayName is true. In the old code we ignore the header, and so we always use the card name. In the new code, we get the header name, but then it turns out we didn't want it after all, and we end up using the card name.
So both versions appear to be equivalent, but the original code is simpler.

Comment 2

[Ian Neal]

(In reply to [e-mail] from comment #1)
> Comment on attachment 642139 [details] [diff] [review]
> Match the logic
> 
> Case 1: PreferDisplayName is false. In the old code, this allows us to get
> the header name, but if that turns out to be empty then we use the card
> name, while in the new code we always get the header name, but again if that
> turns out to be empty then we use the card name.
> Case 2: PreferDisplayName is true. In the old code we ignore the header, and
> so we always use the card name. In the new code, we get the header name, but
> then it turns out we didn't want it after all, and we end up using the card
> name.
> So both versions appear to be equivalent, but the original code is simpler.

Very true, I think I was looking at too many layered patches.