On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, WJCarpenter wrote:
> al> This is, of course, if there are no objections to switching over
> al> to Pspell. There are definately none from me.
>
> OK, I'll bite. I don't know anything about Pspell -- good, bad, or
> indifferent. Given that we have an embedded ispell that works (at
> least on Unix ... does it work elsewhere?), what goodies would we get
> with Pspell?
>
> Here are the "bad" things I know about ispell (and some aren't that
> bad):
>
> 1. Maybe limited platforms (I don't actually know in the Abi case if
> there's such a limit).
Pspell should be more portable and compile where ever AbiWord does. It
should also work on Win32, but right now Win32 has problems with
building shared (DLL) C++ libraries.
> 2. Conflicts with dictionary formats because of other "native"
> versions of ispell installed on a particular user's machine.
Pspell will use Ispell if it is installed on the machine so using Pspell
will avoid this problem.
> 3. Can't spell-check a word longer than 100 characters.
Well , I bite I guess Pspell might have this problem if the ispell module
is use.
> 4. Probably some limitations on spell-checking arbitrary Unicode, but
> Latin-1 (maybe Latin-*) is OK.
Pspell has full Unicode support.
Please browse the AbiWord Archives for a rather extensive conversation on
Aspell, Ispell, Pspell, et all. Look under Feb and Mar of 2000.
--
Kevin Atkinson
kevina at users sourceforge net
http://metalab.unc.edu/kevina/
