Re: More problems with flyspell

[Agustin Martin <agustin.martin@hispalinux.es>]

On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 11:16:05PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> 
> ispell.el is not just an end-user package: it's also a library that provides
> services for flyspell.  The flyspell-last-buffer variable was introduced to
> optimize a particular operation because flyspell needs that optimization,
> but the right place to put that optimization is in the ispell.el library,
> even if the ispell.el end-user commands don't directly benefit from it.
> 
> >> PS: Maybe the same should be done with flyspell-word-cache-word, of course,
> >> but I'm not familiar enough with it.
> 
> I wrote:
> 
> > That is flyspell only, stores last word checked by (flyspell-word), so
> > flyspell-word is not called again unless cursor goes to a different word.
> > However is good to have it cleared when dict is changed to force re-checking
> > of current word, and the dict change is done from ispell.el. I think this
> > one should not be moved.
> 
> Then maybe rather than move flyspell-last-buffer and
> flyspell-word-cache-word to ispell.el, ispell.el should provide an
> ispell-start-process-hook or ispell-change-dict-hook that flyspell could use
> to reset those vars.

This sounds good to me. What others think?

> Doing a (featurep 'flyspell) test is just really ugly.

I admit that even visually, seeing explicit "flyspell" strings and code in
ispell.el is something I dislike too. 

-- 
Agustin