On May 16, 2006 01:08 pm, you wrote:
> Yes, that would work for me.
I'm glad it seems like a simpler solution.
You might probably start looking at /prog/aspell.cpp
around approximately lines 154... as a place to begin with.
That appears a likely place to add another option.
The aspell manual has a list that somewhat matches this, and aspell.1
info sort of matches it as well. There is a partially more up-to-date
version of the aspell.1
in sourceforge
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1411825&group_id=245&atid=300245
I'm just mentioning these so it gives you an idea of what you might want
to name this new option.
Then, it is a matter of getting the library to skip a particular
dictionary when it comes to suggestions.
This is all good and fine assuming that the profanity is spelt right.
okay... but..... there is always a but....
There is still the issue of what will you do if the profanity is spelt
wrong, Aspell will flag it as wrong, and then what will you do?
Are you going to add the new correction to the list of corrections?
Yes, to the user's local list. I want to interfere as little as possible with an individual user who wants to use profanity in his writing.
Will the corrected word (by the user) now end-up in the basic dictionary
if the user decides to update the dictionary with new corrections?
Yes, but I would hope a user would always vet his local dictionary before doing that. I have lots of random errors in mine. At the time of that vetting, he should eliminate the profanity he added (from the transfer to the central dictionary).
Seems like one solution may be creating a new problem.
Needs more thought maybe?
I may not be really understanding your points because I don't see any problem.
I hope that helps you get started.
> I think they have something like this in Hunspell.
Good ideas sometimes get implemented, so it appears it is a good idea
you have there.