Re: Grammar checking

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net>
> Cc: gregory@heytings.org, relekarpayas@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org,
>  m.eliachevitch@posteo.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2023 07:10:22 +0000
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> Agree. I can also see several related bug reports in their repo.
> >> The question is though whether "not bad" is good enough and who is to
> >> decide what is good enough for Emacs.
> >
> > We get to decide that.  Who else?
> 
> I was hoping to hear the criteria you have about good enough grammar
> checking.

I gave my opinion.  I'm not the only one whose opinion matters, but I
have no control on what others say or don't say.  So I'm not sure what
else do you want to hear from me.

> >> I'd be happy if Emacs had a good integrated grammar checking support. Is
> >> there anything else I can help to move this thread forward?
> >
> > Provide a Lisp package to integrate LanguageTool into Emacs in a
> > convenient way?
> 
> What is "convenient"? Is there particular must-have functionality?
> Should it be ispell integration? flyspell?

Both, IMO.

> Probably not the latter as it is word-based.

Indeed, it should check larger chunks of text, like sentences or
paragraphs.

> Though ispell.el also appears to rely on word-based paradigm in the
> code.

That's because this is how the spell-checkers work, I believe.