From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ispell.el, flyspell.el: better ispell/aspell switching Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:14:04 +0200 Message-ID: <4804F06C.7080200@gmail.com> References: <20080404120217.GA7503@agmartin.aq.upm.es> <20080415180042.GA5994@agmartin.aq.upm.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1208283982 21075 80.91.229.12 (15 Apr 2008 18:26:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 18:26:22 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 15 20:26:54 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JlpgF-0000UT-VG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:14:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jlpfb-0005hU-D4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:14:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JlpfX-0005fy-3f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:14:11 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JlpfV-0005fH-UN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:14:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JlpfV-0005f9-OK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:14:09 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.212]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JlpfV-0005Bb-8g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:14:09 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-150-27.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.150.27]:63319 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JlpfT-00067L-5t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:14:08 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: <20080415180042.GA5994@agmartin.aq.upm.es> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080415-1, 2008-04-15), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.150.27 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1JlpfT-00067L-5t. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1JlpfT-00067L-5t 0146ed7b73690653789d5dd962b15c9d X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:95301 Archived-At: Agustin Martin wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 02:02:17PM +0200, Agustin Martin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I come back with a rewritten approach for a problem in current ispell.el and >> flyspell.el when switching spellchecker in an emacs session. >> >> The problem is as follows, when in an emacs run aspell is used for the first >> time, ispell-dictionary-alist is filled with the aspell values, and if >> ispell-program-name is customized or changed to ispell during that emacs run >> it inherits the aspell values, thus failing if there was an aspell entry >> with the same name. Since ispell is still (rarely) needed for pseudo-encodings >> like [\'a -> á] I think this should not happen and all ispell values should >> be restored in such case. Also current behavior is too ispell/aspell >> centric, in case support for another spellchecker is ever added. >> >> In the proposed attached patches ... > > Any comment? I have not looked at your patch, but your reasoning above seems ok to me.