[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#32280: 26.1; FLYSPELL-BUFFER sometimes misbehaves for some input in
bug#32280: 26.1; FLYSPELL-BUFFER sometimes misbehaves for some input in a large enough buffer
Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:09:54 +0300
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
I have crafted some sample data as well as wrote instruction how to
reproduce the bug.
The sample file can be found by following this link:
The instruction alongside with the required code can be downloaded from
I made some screenshots which demonstrate the bug:
I haven't been able to demonstrate the case when a misspelt word is not
highlighted though. I will send an update should I craft the required data.
I hope this is helpful.
The text where I encountered the problem is a personal e-mail, so I
can not share it as it is. I will try to craft a sample text and
describe the steps for bug reproduction using emacs -Q.
Can you post the text where this happens?
AFAICT, you have removed a single line:
(< found-length misspell-length)
I am also replaced:
;; Size matches, we really found it.
(= found-length misspell-length)
;; Size and content matches, we really found it.
(and (= found-length misspell-length)
(string= found word))
I believe, in this case there is no need in (< found-length
As about my reasoning behind the changes: I felt that it is not right
to mark the word as misspelt without actually checking the content.
Moreover, look at the original comment right behind the (<
found-length misspell-length) line:
Can you take me through your reasoning why this line is incorrect, and
what assumptions it made that are correct for English, but not for
;; Misspelling has higher length than
;; what flyspell considers the word.
;; Caused by boundary-chars mismatch.
;; Validating seems safe.
I am not sure that comparing length of found word and misspelt word is
enough to make an assumption that validating is safe (even considering
the preceding checks). The keyword here, I think, is 'seems'. For some
reason, it really works most of the time.
I believe that the bug should be possible to reproduce for texts in
English too. For some reason, I have not encountered this problem
while spell checking English. I should note that flyspell-buffer works
fine for *most* of the texts in Russian and Ukrainian which I have
checked and the discussed issue is rarely encountered. I did not know
that It exists until I started using flyspell-buffer regularly.
bug#32280: 26.1; FLYSPELL-BUFFER sometimes misbehaves for some input in a large enough buffer, Agustin Martin, 2018/07/27
bug#32280: 26.1; FLYSPELL-BUFFER sometimes misbehaves for some input in a large enough buffer, Artem Boldarev, 2018/07/27