flyspell overlays removed in comments: does this make sense?

flyspell overlays removed in comments: does this make sense?

[Eric S Fraga]

Hello all,

for some time (years, really), I've suffered with flyspell overlays
disappearing in comments in org documents.  It never occurred to me that
this was due to org itself so I just put up with and chalked it up to
one of those Emacs mysteries.  Today, for unrelated reasons [1], I ended
up looking at the code, specifically

org-fontify-meta-lines-and-blocks-1

and see that org explicitly removes flyspell overlays in comments.

Before I look into maybe adding a user option for the flyspell issue,
can somebody explain the rationale for this?  My comments tend to be
natural languages so flyspell is most definitely useful.  Okay, spelling
errors in comments may matter less in terms of dissemination but
still...

Or have I misunderstood something fundamental?

thank you,
eric


Footnotes:

[1] The unrelated reason is that I was looking at how I could get my own
user-defined meta lines ("#+calc: " for my use of embedded calc in org,
for the curious amongst you) fontified the way I want them.  Not easy,
as far as I can see.  I further noticed that org also removes flyspell
overlays from any "other" meta line, i.e. any other meta line not
processed by specific code.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga, with org release_9.5.1-279-g8908fb in Emacs 29.0.50
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: flyspell overlays removed in comments: does this make sense?

[Ihor Radchenko]

Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> writes:

> for some time (years, really), I've suffered with flyspell overlays
> disappearing in comments in org documents.  It never occurred to me that
> this was due to org itself so I just put up with and chalked it up to
> one of those Emacs mysteries.  Today, for unrelated reasons [1], I ended
> up looking at the code, specifically

Not only comments. Same for #+captions (which made me miss spelling
errors in my figure captions).

> org-fontify-meta-lines-and-blocks-1
>
> and see that org explicitly removes flyspell overlays in comments.
>
> Before I look into maybe adding a user option for the flyspell issue,
> can somebody explain the rationale for this?  My comments tend to be
> natural languages so flyspell is most definitely useful.  Okay, spelling
> errors in comments may matter less in terms of dissemination but
> still...

Looking at git log, the intention was avoiding flyspell highlights in
cases like #+IKNOWTHISISNOTREALWORD: keyword value. Removing the
highlights from user text is a side effect.

I consider this a bug and mark your report as such.

Confirmed

Best,
Ihor

Re: flyspell overlays removed in comments: does this make sense?

[Eric S Fraga]

On Wednesday, 22 Dec 2021 at 22:10, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> I consider this a bug and mark your report as such.

Thank you.  I'm glad I'm not alone!

-- 
: Eric S Fraga, with org release_9.5.1-279-g8908fb in Emacs 29.0.50
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096