On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Gary Setter wrote: > <snip> > Hi Kevin, Jose, > > Again, thanks for pointing out the compression utilities I > already had. I ended up using munch. > Munch expects the number of words on the first line. It also put > the number of items after compression on the first line. Since > aspell does not expect the word count, it got in the way. I > modified munch to take a word count as a command line argument. > Do you think such as change is worthy of a patch?
No. As that program is going to disappear since the Aspell utility will have a munch-list command starting with Aspell 0.60.2. > Also, making the compressed list was just one step in making the > minimum dictionary that fit my vocabulary. > The steps included, > making a representative sample, > searching the word lists, > affix compression, > combining lists, > compiling into rws, > making the multi file. > > I'm not sure about the combining lists step. Looking at the code, > it seemed to me that making one rws file would be more efficent. > But I'm not so sure. Any ideas on this? Yes the fewer compiled dictionaries the better. > Should there be an application for managing the process for the > user? Maybe. -- http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org _______________________________________________ Aspell-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/aspell-devel
