>From: Eli Zaretskii >To: henri-biard@francemel.fr >Subject: Re: bug#49037: flyspell word correction frustrating >Date: 15/06/2021 19:33:50 Europe/Paris >Cc: larsi@gnus.org; >   49037@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: henri-biard@francemel.fr >> Cc: larsi@gnus.org, >> 49037@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 19:08:48 +0200 (CEST) >> >> >> If it was good information I would not complain. >> >> >What is not good about it? >> >> For instance: >> >> 1. It does not tell me that aspell is the default >Why should it? You set up your system with whatever spell-checker you >want, and Emacs uses that. It is not Emacs's business to tell you >which spell-checker to install and use. I have multiple ones and make comparisons between them.  So I really want to know what it uses.  After all the information is there and that is what emacs actually does. Should I not be able to easily know what it is doing under the hood.  Emacs Self Documentation should help me with that. >> 2. It does not tell me that even when I use ispell-word, it might actually >> do something else (aspell-word maybe). >ispell-word is a command, it is unrelated to the program being >invoked. The manual clearly says that those commands can work with >any one of the 4 supported spell-checkers. >> 3. It does not describe that it searches PATH. >That's an implementation detail. If you want to know those details, >you have the source to read and study. The user manual explains how >to use the commands, not how the commands work. Explains with no examples or much description of ispell-program-name, which for me is very important. Because Gnu Aspell was designed to replace Ispell, how about deprecating Ispell and simply have emacs-ispell be the general framework for orthographic study. That would certainly solve the problem. Would appreciate if you do not consider me a "Bad Actor".