bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[henri-biard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 352 bytes --]


Ispell is available in Emacs for general use.  But Aspell, which is stated as a spell checker

designed to replace Ispell is not available for general use in Emacs.  I would welcome

Aspell in Emacs as I wish to use it.  Would be good to have selections work in minibuffer

in same way as completions are made available with ivy.






[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 400 bytes --]

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: henri-biard@francemel.fr
> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 15:41:24 +0200 (CEST)
> 
> Ispell is available in Emacs for general use.  But Aspell, which is stated as a spell checker
> designed to replace Ispell is not available for general use in Emacs.  I would welcome
> Aspell in Emacs as I wish to use it.

??? The ispell.el library in Emacs supports the programs 'ispell',
'aspell', 'hunspell', and 'enchant'.  If you have more than one of
these on PATH, you select the program you want to use by setting the
variable ispell-program-name.

So I think what you want is already possible, for quite some time.

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> So I think what you want is already possible, for quite some time.

Indeed; so I'm closing this bug report.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[henri-biard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1760 bytes --]

Thank you for the useful information.  I would be helpful for many users

if there was more detailed information on how to set things up exactly with

real example code, that one would actually use.



Currently, I can only find a brief mention in



16.4 Checking and Correcting Spelling



It is unfortunate that emacs are still uses the name "ispell" because it erroneously

makes believe that one is making use of ispell, even thogh one in using ispell.



Would you seriously consider have a generic spell framework for emacs that

one can set up to use ispell, aspell etc.  In my opinion, the default should be set

to use aspell because its manual says that it ought to do a superior job and is intended

to replace ispell. 



Does one use the command this way



(setq ispell-program-name "aspell)



or this way



(setq ispell-program-name "/usr/bin/aspell")



Many Gratitudes

Henri






From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: henri-biard@francemel.fr
Subject: bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs
Date: 15/06/2021 16:24:32 Europe/Paris
Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org

> From: henri-biard@francemel.fr
> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 15:41:24 +0200 (CEST)
> 
> Ispell is available in Emacs for general use. But Aspell, which is stated as a spell checker
> designed to replace Ispell is not available for general use in Emacs. I would welcome
> Aspell in Emacs as I wish to use it.

??? The ispell.el library in Emacs supports the programs 'ispell',
'aspell', 'hunspell', and 'enchant'. If you have more than one of
these on PATH, you select the program you want to use by setting the
variable ispell-program-name.

So I think what you want is already possible, for quite some time.





[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2279 bytes --]

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: henri-biard@francemel.fr
> Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:09:32 +0200 (CEST)
> 
> Currently, I can only find a brief mention in
> 
> 16.4 Checking and Correcting Spelling

It isn't a brief mention, it's a whole section dedicated to
spell-checking commands.

> It is unfortunate that emacs are still uses the name "ispell" because it erroneously
> makes believe that one is making use of ispell, even thogh one in using ispell.

If you read that section, you will realize that "ispell" is the name
of the Lisp package, and does not mean we only use "ispell" the
program.  That section says so at its very beginning.

> Would you seriously consider have a generic spell framework for emacs that
> one can set up to use ispell, aspell etc.

We already have such a generic framework.

> In my opinion, the default should be set
> to use aspell because its manual says that it ought to do a superior job and is intended
> to replace ispell. 

The default is already aspell:

  (defcustom ispell-program-name
    (or (executable-find "aspell")
	(executable-find "ispell")
	(executable-find "hunspell")
	"ispell")

As you see, Emacs looks for a program in the order shown above, with
aspell being the first one.

> Does one use the command this way
> 
> (setq ispell-program-name "aspell)
> 
> or this way
> 
> (setq ispell-program-name "/usr/bin/aspell")

If aspell is on PATH, it doesn't matter which form you use.  If it is
not on PATH, then you should use the absolute file name.

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[henri-biard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2485 bytes --]



>From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>To: henri-biard@francemel.fr
>Subject: bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs
>Date: 15/06/2021 17:26:19 Europe/Paris
>Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org

>> From: henri-biard@francemel.fr
>> Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:09:32 +0200 (CEST)
>> 
>> Currently, I can only find a brief mention in
>> 
>> 16.4 Checking and Correcting Spelling

>It isn't a brief mention, it's a whole section dedicated to
>spell-checking commands.



There is no mention of ispell-program-name actually.



>> It is unfortunate that emacs are still uses the name "ispell" because it erroneously
>> makes believe that one is making use of ispell, even thogh one in using ispell.

>If you read that section, you will realize that "ispell" is the name
>of the Lisp package, and does not mean we only use "ispell" the
>program. That section says so at its very beginning.



That can be highly confusing because it is very easy to confuse with ispell the program,

and to understand that ispell is actually aspell (or anything you want for that matter).



>> Would you seriously consider have a generic spell framework for emacs that
>> one can set up to use ispell, aspell etc.

>We already have such a generic framework.



It looks to me that it is basically a hack of ispell, likely the result that it was easier 

and quicker for the developer to do it that way.  Correct me if I am wrong.



>> In my opinion, the default should be set
>> to use aspell because its manual says that it ought to do a superior job and is intended
>> to replace ispell. 

>The default is already aspell:

>(defcustom ispell-program-name
>(or (executable-find "aspell")
>(executable-find "ispell")
>(executable-find "hunspell")
>"ispell")

>As you see, Emacs looks for a program in the order shown above, with
>aspell being the first one.



Had tried lookinf for the self documentation for ispell-program-name, but could not 

access anything.  Indeed I had to file a report for people to tell me this.



>> Does one use the command this way
>> 
>> (setq ispell-program-name "aspell)
>> 
>> or this way
>> 
>> (setq ispell-program-name "/usr/bin/aspell")

>If aspell is on PATH, it doesn't matter which form you use. If it is

>not on PATH, then you should use the absolute file name.



Would you also say that the information is in the manual?



Many Gratitudes.









[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3213 bytes --]

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: henri-biard@francemel.fr
> Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 19:00:13 +0200 (CEST)
> 
> >It isn't a brief mention, it's a whole section dedicated to
> >spell-checking commands.
> 
> There is no mention of ispell-program-name actually.

If that's the only problem, then I already fixed it about 2 hours ago.

> >> Would you seriously consider have a generic spell framework for emacs that
> >> one can set up to use ispell, aspell etc.
> 
> >We already have such a generic framework.
> 
> It looks to me that it is basically a hack of ispell, likely the result that it was easier 
> and quicker for the developer to do it that way.  Correct me if I am wrong.

You are wrong.  Please read the code, don't just judge it by the name
of the package (which is just a historic incident).

> Had tried lookinf for the self documentation for ispell-program-name, but could not 
> access anything.

"C-h v ispell-program-name RET" would have shown its documentation.

"M-x customize-group RET ispell RET" would have shown you all the
customizable options for the package.

> Indeed I had to file a report for people to tell me this.

I suggest to spend some time learning to use the Emacs help commands,
such as the two commands I show above, they usually make discovery
fast and efficient.

In any case, since Emacs already looks for known spell-checkers, and
already prefers aspell, my conclusion from the fact that it didn't
work for you is that you have some unusual setup, which should be
quite rare nowadays.  The defaults are set such that the user will not
need to know about this variable.

> >If aspell is on PATH, it doesn't matter which form you use. If it is
> >not on PATH, then you should use the absolute file name.
> 
> Would you also say that the information is in the manual?

I don't think it should be.  When you install a speller such as
aspell, if its executable file is not on PATH, your system is
misconfigured.  The Emacs manual is not the place where people should
look for information about setting up spelling on misconfigured
systems.

IOW, spelling with aspell in Emacs should work as long as invoking
aspell from the shell prompt works.  If it doesn't work to invoke
aspell from the shell prompt, then you should first correct your
system's configuration so that it does.

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 20:30:08 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> In any case, since Emacs already looks for known spell-checkers, and
> already prefers aspell, my conclusion from the fact that it didn't
> work for you is that you have some unusual setup, which should be
> quite rare nowadays.  The defaults are set such that the user will not
> need to know about this variable.

Actually, it's more likely that everything worked as intended on your
system, i.e. Emacs uses aspell for spell-checking commands, and you
simply _thought_ it didn't work because you expected to find commands
like aspell-word.

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[henri-biard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1230 bytes --]

Agreed, it was mainly a confusion thing.  Hoped that Emacs would be clearer on what it was actually doing.  Many times historic things get in the way.  As things move forward, historic

things should be gradually moved to the side and concentrate on the realities of today.  It is a wise

comment but not something I can force.  But it is important to understand this.



From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: henri-biard@francemel.fr
Subject: bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs
Date: 15/06/2021 19:51:08 Europe/Paris
Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org

> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 20:30:08 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> In any case, since Emacs already looks for known spell-checkers, and
> already prefers aspell, my conclusion from the fact that it didn't
> work for you is that you have some unusual setup, which should be
> quite rare nowadays. The defaults are set such that the user will not
> need to know about this variable.

Actually, it's more likely that everything worked as intended on your
system, i.e. Emacs uses aspell for spell-checking commands, and you
simply _thought_ it didn't work because you expected to find commands
like aspell-word.





[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1498 bytes --]

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[henri-biard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4532 bytes --]

> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> To: henri-biard@francemel.fr
> Subject: Re: bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs
> Date: 15/06/2021 19:30:08 Europe/Paris
> Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org

> > From: henri-biard@francemel.fr
> > Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org
> > Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 19:00:13 +0200 (CEST)
> > 
> > >It isn't a brief mention, it's a whole section dedicated to
> > >spell-checking commands.
> > 
> > There is no mention of ispell-program-name actually.

> If that's the only problem, then I already fixed it about 2 hours ago.



Much gratitude for that.



> > >> Would you seriously consider have a generic spell framework for emacs that
> > >> one can set up to use ispell, aspell etc.
> > 
> > >We already have such a generic framework.
> > 
> > It looks to me that it is basically a hack of ispell, likely the result that it was easier 
> > and quicker for the developer to do it that way. Correct me if I am wrong.

> You are wrong. Please read the code, don't just judge it by the name
of the package (which is just a historic incident).



It is valuable to go past the historic after significant time has passed as it easily leads

to confusion or obfuscation.



May I suggest that the generic framework uses a name which in different that using

the old ispell name. And within that framowork, one could call ispell, aspell or whatever,

so there is no longer a conflict of understanding between ispell the framework and ispell

the program.



> > Had tried lookinf for the self documentation for ispell-program-name, but could not 
> > access anything.

> "C-h v ispell-program-name RET" would have shown its documentation.



There are no matches for ispell-program-name if you try to do C-h v ispell-program-name



> "M-x customize-group RET ispell RET" would have shown you all the
> customizable options for the package.

> > Indeed I had to file a report for people to tell me this.

> I suggest to spend some time learning to use the Emacs help commands,
> such as the two commands I show above, they usually make discovery
> fast and efficient.

> In any case, since Emacs already looks for known spell-checkers, and
> already prefers aspell, my conclusion from the fact that it didn't
> work for you is that you have some unusual setup, which should be
> quite rare nowadays. The defaults are set such that the user will not
> need to know about this variable.



There has been a misunderstanding that aspell was not working.  It was 

working but my impression was that using ispell on emacs was using

ispell the program.



I am convinced that the user should know about the variable.  It is an important

variable and users should know what spell checker is being used.



> > > >If aspell is on PATH, it doesn't matter which form you use. If it is
> >not on PATH, then you should use the absolute file name.
> > 
> > Would you also say that the information is in the manual?

> I don't think it should be. When you install a speller such as
> aspell, if its executable file is not on PATH, your system is
> misconfigured. The Emacs manual is not the place where people should
> look for information about setting up spelling on misconfigured
> systems.

> IOW, spelling with aspell in Emacs should work as long as invoking
> aspell from the shell prompt works. If it doesn't work to invoke
> aspell from the shell prompt, then you should first correct your

> system's configuration so that it does.



Correct, but it is hard to understand what spelling program is being used.



Gnu packages should work well together.  The Gnu Aspell manual says that 

Aspell is a Free and Open Source spell checker designed to eventually replace

Ispell.This creates confusion and emacs should stop using ispell by name,

except when it is actually using the ispell checker.



What shall we call the general emacs spell checker? orthography-mode comes

to mind.  The mode could additionally highlight incorrect words.  Found many people complaining about flyspell.  But the idea of flyspell - that of highlighting misspelled

words - is good and useful in practice.  One can argue that doing the checking on

the fly can be disruptive and slow.  I can accept that.  There can be a command 

(e.g. orthographic-highlight) that can do the highlighting at user request (on paragraph,

region' or buffer context) rather than continuously. 



Many Thanks






[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5421 bytes --]

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: henri-biard@francemel.fr
> Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 20:03:53 +0200 (CEST)
> 
> > > It looks to me that it is basically a hack of ispell, likely the result that it was easier 
> > > and quicker for the developer to do it that way. Correct me if I am wrong.
> 
> > You are wrong. Please read the code, don't just judge it by the name
> of the package (which is just a historic incident).
> 
> It is valuable to go past the historic after significant time has passed as it easily leads
> to confusion or obfuscation.
> 
> May I suggest that the generic framework uses a name which in different that using
> the old ispell name. And within that framowork, one could call ispell, aspell or whatever,
> so there is no longer a conflict of understanding between ispell the framework and ispell
> the program.

We are not going to change the names, sorry.  Too many Emacs users are
used to these names.

> > > Had tried lookinf for the self documentation for ispell-program-name, but could not 
> > > access anything.
> 
> > "C-h v ispell-program-name RET" would have shown its documentation.
> 
> There are no matches for ispell-program-name if you try to do C-h v ispell-program-name

There will be once you invoke the first ispell-* command.

> > In any case, since Emacs already looks for known spell-checkers, and
> > already prefers aspell, my conclusion from the fact that it didn't
> > work for you is that you have some unusual setup, which should be
> > quite rare nowadays. The defaults are set such that the user will not
> > need to know about this variable.
> 
> There has been a misunderstanding that aspell was not working.  It was 
> working but my impression was that using ispell on emacs was using
> ispell the program.
> 
> I am convinced that the user should know about the variable.  It is an important
> variable and users should know what spell checker is being used.

Then I'm sorry, but we will have to agree to disagree on that.

> > IOW, spelling with aspell in Emacs should work as long as invoking
> > aspell from the shell prompt works. If it doesn't work to invoke
> > aspell from the shell prompt, then you should first correct your
> > system's configuration so that it does.
> 
> Correct, but it is hard to understand what spelling program is being used.

You can always ask.  Like here: you asked and got the answer.

> Gnu packages should work well together.  The Gnu Aspell manual says that 
> Aspell is a Free and Open Source spell checker designed to eventually replace
> Ispell.This creates confusion and emacs should stop using ispell by name,
> except when it is actually using the ispell checker.

You are again sticking to the name.  The name is not important: I'm
quite sure Emacs was using aspell on your system (if it is installed),

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[henri-biard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4571 bytes --]

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: henri-biard@francemel.fr
Subject: Re: bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs
Date: 15/06/2021 20:12:22 Europe/Paris
Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org

>> From: henri-biard@francemel.fr
>> Cc: 49039@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 20:03:53 +0200 (CEST)
>> 
>> > > It looks to me that it is basically a hack of ispell, likely the result that it was easier 
>> > > and quicker for the developer to do it that way. Correct me if I am wrong.
>> 
>> > You are wrong. Please read the code, don't just judge it by the name
>> of the package (which is just a historic incident).
>> 
>> It is valuable to go past the historic after significant time has passed as it easily leads
>> to confusion or obfuscation.
>> 
>> May I suggest that the generic framework uses a name which in different that using
>> the old ispell name. And within that framowork, one could call ispell, aspell or whatever,
>> so there is no longer a conflict of understanding between ispell the framework and ispell
>> the program.

>We are not going to change the names, sorry. Too many Emacs users are
>used to these names.



Then it would be good to have the program ispell deprecated and letting aspell

take over, following the Gnu Project Plan.



>> > > Had tried lookinf for the self documentation for ispell-program-name, but could not 
>> > > access anything.
>> 
>> > "C-h v ispell-program-name RET" would have shown its documentation.
>> 
>> There are no matches for ispell-program-name if you try to do C-h v ispell-program-name

>There will be once you invoke the first ispell-* command.



Let's try to avoid such requirement and have the ability to access that information

without having to call other ispell commands first.  There could be ispell-mode, once

a user activates it, the documentation for all ispell functionality would be available.



>> > In any case, since Emacs already looks for known spell-checkers, and
>> > already prefers aspell, my conclusion from the fact that it didn't
>> > work for you is that you have some unusual setup, which should be
>> > quite rare nowadays. The defaults are set such that the user will not
>> > need to know about this variable.
>> 
>> There has been a misunderstanding that aspell was not working. It was 
>> working but my impression was that using ispell on emacs was using
>> ispell the program.
>> 
>> I am convinced that the user should know about the variable. It is an important
>> variable and users should know what spell checker is being used.

>Then I'm sorry, but we will have to agree to disagree on that.



Or be able to get to know about it from emacs self documentation and from manual.

I frequently try to get information from emacs.  Emacs has too many hidden things.



The added benefit would be that people would know about the standalone program.

Or do people not really use spell checker in emacs much?



>> > IOW, spelling with aspell in Emacs should work as long as invoking
>> > aspell from the shell prompt works. If it doesn't work to invoke
>> > aspell from the shell prompt, then you should first correct your
>> > system's configuration so that it does.
>> 
>> Correct, but it is hard to understand what spelling program is being used.

>You can always ask. Like here: you asked and got the answer.



Yes, but do you really wanted users to always have to ask.  And do users really

want to have to ask to know.  Personally, I want to get on with my work, without

wasting time asking about this and that.  Would also avoid the frustration of people

responding to tho same question over and over again.  From operational point of

view, when a question is being asked too frequently, it is indication of some deficit.



>> Gnu packages should work well together. The Gnu Aspell manual says that 
>> Aspell is a Free and Open Source spell checker designed to eventually replace
>> Ispell.This creates confusion and emacs should stop using ispell by name,
>> except when it is actually using the ispell checker.

>You are again sticking to the name. The name is not important: I'm

>quite sure Emacs was using aspell on your system (if it is installed),



Good. I wanted to use aspell.  Am not sticking with the name, but it is time for gnu

to deprecate the ispell program in favour of aspell.  It would then be much easier for

emacs users to to consider ispell in emacs as the general framework for orthographic

correction.







[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5466 bytes --]

bug#49039: Aspell in Emacs

[henri-biard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 471 bytes --]

>> > > Had tried lookinf for the self documentation for ispell-program-name, but could not 
>> > > access anything.
>> 
>> > "C-h v ispell-program-name RET" would have shown its documentation.
>> 
>> There are no matches for ispell-program-name if you try to do C-h v ispell-program-name

>There will be once you invoke the first ispell-* command.



Have done as you suggested, but self documentation for ispell-program-name still

does not show up.




[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 601 bytes --]