From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Francis Belliveau Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: ispell-buffer skips repetitive suspects after the first is accepted Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 19:30:19 -0400 Message-ID: <33612209-092D-4B13-AE1F-E2180795281E@comcast.net> References: <837fskqvsr.fsf@gnu.org> <83vbg3pqbh.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1431387061 21863 80.91.229.3 (11 May 2015 23:31:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 23:31:01 +0000 (UTC) To: "help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org" Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 12 01:30:49 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Yrx9s-0004hK-OH for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 May 2015 01:30:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40128 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yrx9s-0004Qn-2i for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 19:30:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48880) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yrx9Y-0004Qh-KG for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 19:30:29 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yrx9V-0004NI-O8 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 19:30:28 -0400 Original-Received: from resqmta-ch2-06v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.38]:46749) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yrx9V-0004MC-F7 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 19:30:25 -0400 Original-Received: from resomta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.100]) by resqmta-ch2-06v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id SnUE1q00B2AWL2D01nWLYt; Mon, 11 May 2015 23:30:20 +0000 Original-Received: from [10.0.1.3] ([76.119.172.160]) by resomta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id SnWK1q00P3TzthY01nWLRJ; Mon, 11 May 2015 23:30:20 +0000 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1431387020; bh=gr71wKfk33UhmtuYbuUmXKB9H5ZvhOmOC43bsQ4qLn4=; h=Received:Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date: Message-Id:To; b=XiGseAhIBzYwMPPRpIfTOdUhmgSAOOXutGpFk1DkSKnrKdQU3pjlMUEf/ksdnW8wE l3AJODccp82BzOhY8LEJEFfADMk2BBw4bTav2W1TOMQSDSxMGYAT54F+rYw0ubbDk+ xeLfnmGscOx4rDpaL614BQql+5rg9aDzcszrFvn2qH6M74/kRlZombYimc+vO5MO54 js0FNHIYsZLW9F9V0S1beG5ZJ7bewZ7u59ZqYESD5TpyYZDfOQNlGeP8Chm03pbL6Q jYaXZqM0H7j+nOl/GjX6hdEI4q2nHT/E6hMGrvVWGlG0q6VKhgRWFLcnX+SZB1mMFm evXPtlyXHqNeA== X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 69.252.207.38 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:104411 Archived-At: Ok Juergen, I see the difference. It is a nuance that I missed since I = have never used ispell. However, I still stand on the fact that if the original programmer = thought this a useful feature, then it should remain available. I acknowledge that you think that it is a bad feature, therefore and = option should be available for users to choose which action they feel = appropriate/ I know that in general these types of options can get very prolific. = However, with proper choice of default behavior, few will have the need = to deal with them. Also, with proper documentation of options, those = that do=92t like a behavior can get what they want also. Fran > On May 10, 2015, at 5:23 AM, J=FCrgen Hartmann = wrote: >=20 > Thank you, Eli Zaretskii, for the clarification: >=20 >>> From: Francis Belliveau >>> Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 19:01:06 -0400 >>>=20 >>> This is clearly an intended feature. I am personally annoyed by the >>> inability to indicate something suspicious is valid for a particular >>> document. >>=20 >> This "feature" doesn't do what you want: if the same word happens on >> another line, it will be flagged again. Only words on the same line >> are exempt. >=20 > @ Eli Zaretskii, you got exactly my point. It is not about local = dictionaries > or document specific spelling--this is a different issue--but about = the fact > that accepts a spelling for the whole line instead of accepting = it for > one particular instance only. >=20 > Juergen >=20 > =20