Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 18:23 +, Pip Cet via Gcc-patches wrote: > David Malcolm writes: > > > On Sat, 2020-05-30 at 18:51 +, Pip Cet wrote: > > > How's this? > > > > Thanks; looks good to me. Hopefully this doesn't clash with Tom's > > patch. > > It doesn't, but I hope I got the commit message right this time. > > (I don't have git access, so if someone could commit this if it's > approved, that would be great). Thanks. Pushed. jeff
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
David Malcolm writes:
> On Sat, 2020-05-30 at 18:51 +, Pip Cet wrote:
>> How's this?
>
> Thanks; looks good to me. Hopefully this doesn't clash with Tom's
> patch.
It doesn't, but I hope I got the commit message right this time.
(I don't have git access, so if someone could commit this if it's
approved, that would be great).
>From 7e89a6be601b268b134e20c2702bd55945388a22 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pip Cet
Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 13:39:09 +
Subject: [PATCH] Don't test the triangle inequality in the spellcheck.c
self-test
The variant of editing distance we use doesn't satisfy the triangle
inequality.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* spellcheck.c (test_data): Add problematic strings.
(test_metric_conditions): Don't test the triangle inequality
condition, which our distance function does not satisfy.
---
gcc/spellcheck.c | 22 --
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/spellcheck.c b/gcc/spellcheck.c
index 9f7351f364f..45c41d7cef9 100644
--- a/gcc/spellcheck.c
+++ b/gcc/spellcheck.c
@@ -474,13 +474,17 @@ static const char * const test_data[] = {
"food",
"boo",
"1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890"
+ "abc",
+ "ac",
+ "ca",
};
/* Verify that get_edit_distance appears to be a sane distance function,
- i.e. the conditions for being a metric. This is done directly for a
- small set of examples, using test_data above. This is O(N^3) in the size
- of the array, due to the test for the triangle inequality, so we keep the
- array small. */
+ even though it doesn't satisfy the conditions for being a metric. (This
+ is because the triangle inequality fails to hold: the distance between
+ "ca" and "ac" is 1, and so is the distance between "abc" and "ac", but
+ the distance between "abc" and "ca" is 3. Algorithms that calculate the
+ true Levenshtein-Damerau metric are much more expensive.) */
static void
test_metric_conditions ()
@@ -504,16 +508,6 @@ test_metric_conditions ()
edit_distance_t dist_ji
= get_edit_distance (test_data[j], test_data[i]);
ASSERT_EQ (dist_ij, dist_ji);
-
- /* Triangle inequality. */
- for (int k = 0; k < num_test_cases; k++)
- {
- edit_distance_t dist_ik
- = get_edit_distance (test_data[i], test_data[k]);
- edit_distance_t dist_jk
- = get_edit_distance (test_data[j], test_data[k]);
- ASSERT_TRUE (dist_ik <= dist_ij + dist_jk);
- }
}
}
}
--
2.27.0.rc0
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
On Sat, 2020-05-30 at 18:51 +, Pip Cet wrote: > On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 5:06 PM David Malcolm > wrote: > > On Sat, 2020-05-30 at 13:40 +, Pip Cet via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > I think we should just omit the triangle inequality test from the > > > self-test, as in the attached patch. > > > > I like the idea, > > Thanks! > > > but can you update the comment so that it explains why > > it's not a metric? (better to capture that in a comment in the > > source > > rather than just in the mailing list archives). > > How's this? Thanks; looks good to me. Hopefully this doesn't clash with Tom's patch. Dave
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
On Mon, 2020-06-01 at 14:11 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote: > > Did the full DejaGnu testsuite get run? There are a lot of tests > > in it > > that make use of this code. > > I did "make check" and only saw some XFAILs. > > Here's v2 of the patch, which I think addresses your comments. I did > not add a new test of get_edit_distance, because as I mentioned > earlier, > an existing test already does what you asked for. > > Tom > > commit e897a99dada8d3935343ebf7b14ad7ec36515b3d > Author: Tom Tromey > Date: Fri May 29 10:46:57 2020 -0600 > > Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions > > I got this error message when editing gcc and recompiling: > > ../../gcc/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/decl.c:7714:39: error: > ‘DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_all’ was not declared in this scope; did you > mean ‘DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_GDB’? > 7714 | = debug_info && gnat_encodings == > DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_all; > | ^~~ > ~ > | DWARF_GNAT_ENCODING > S_GDB > > This suggestion could be improved -- what happened here is that I > failed to upper-case the word, and DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_ALL was > the > correct spelling. > > This patch changes gcc's spell checker to prefer simple case > changes > when possible. > > I tested this using the self-tests. A new self-test is also > included. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * spellcheck.c (CASE_COST): New define. > (BASE_COST): New define. > (get_edit_distance): Recognize case changes. > (get_edit_distance_cutoff): Update. > (test_edit_distances): Update. > (get_old_cutoff): Update. > (test_find_closest_string): Add case sensitivity test. Thanks; looks good to me. Dave
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
> Did the full DejaGnu testsuite get run? There are a lot of tests in it
> that make use of this code.
I did "make check" and only saw some XFAILs.
Here's v2 of the patch, which I think addresses your comments. I did
not add a new test of get_edit_distance, because as I mentioned earlier,
an existing test already does what you asked for.
Tom
commit e897a99dada8d3935343ebf7b14ad7ec36515b3d
Author: Tom Tromey
Date: Fri May 29 10:46:57 2020 -0600
Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
I got this error message when editing gcc and recompiling:
../../gcc/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/decl.c:7714:39: error:
‘DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_all’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean
‘DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_GDB’?
7714 | = debug_info && gnat_encodings == DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_all;
| ^~~~
| DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_GDB
This suggestion could be improved -- what happened here is that I
failed to upper-case the word, and DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_ALL was the
correct spelling.
This patch changes gcc's spell checker to prefer simple case changes
when possible.
I tested this using the self-tests. A new self-test is also included.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* spellcheck.c (CASE_COST): New define.
(BASE_COST): New define.
(get_edit_distance): Recognize case changes.
(get_edit_distance_cutoff): Update.
(test_edit_distances): Update.
(get_old_cutoff): Update.
(test_find_closest_string): Add case sensitivity test.
diff --git a/gcc/spellcheck.c b/gcc/spellcheck.c
index 7891260a258..9f7351f364f 100644
--- a/gcc/spellcheck.c
+++ b/gcc/spellcheck.c
@@ -25,14 +25,22 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
#include "spellcheck.h"
#include "selftest.h"
+/* Cost of a case transformation. */
+#define CASE_COST 1
+
+/* Cost of another kind of edit. */
+#define BASE_COST 2
+
/* Get the edit distance between the two strings: the minimal
number of edits that are needed to change one string into another,
where edits can be one-character insertions, removals, or substitutions,
or transpositions of two adjacent characters (counting as one "edit").
- This implementation uses the Wagner-Fischer algorithm for the
- Damerau-Levenshtein distance; specifically, the "optimal string alignment
- distance" or "restricted edit distance" variant. */
+ This implementation uses a modified variant of the Wagner-Fischer
+ algorithm for the Damerau-Levenshtein distance; specifically, the
+ "optimal string alignment distance" or "restricted edit distance"
+ variant. This implementation has been further modified to take
+ case into account. */
edit_distance_t
get_edit_distance (const char *s, int len_s,
@@ -47,9 +55,9 @@ get_edit_distance (const char *s, int len_s,
}
if (len_s == 0)
-return len_t;
+return BASE_COST * len_t;
if (len_t == 0)
-return len_s;
+return BASE_COST * len_s;
/* We effectively build a matrix where each (i, j) contains the
distance between the prefix strings s[0:j] and t[0:i].
@@ -67,7 +75,7 @@ get_edit_distance (const char *s, int len_s,
/* The first row is for the case of an empty target string, which
we can reach by deleting every character in the source string. */
for (int i = 0; i < len_s + 1; i++)
-v_one_ago[i] = i;
+v_one_ago[i] = i * BASE_COST;
/* Build successive rows. */
for (int i = 0; i < len_t; i++)
@@ -83,21 +91,28 @@ get_edit_distance (const char *s, int len_s,
/* The initial column is for the case of an empty source string; we
can reach prefixes of the target string of length i
by inserting i characters. */
- v_next[0] = i + 1;
+ v_next[0] = (i + 1) * BASE_COST;
/* Build the rest of the row by considering neighbors to
the north, west and northwest. */
for (int j = 0; j < len_s; j++)
{
- edit_distance_t cost = (s[j] == t[i] ? 0 : 1);
- edit_distance_t deletion = v_next[j] + 1;
- edit_distance_t insertion= v_one_ago[j + 1] + 1;
+ edit_distance_t cost;
+
+ if (s[j] == t[i])
+ cost = 0;
+ else if (TOLOWER (s[j]) == TOLOWER (t[i]))
+ cost = CASE_COST;
+ else
+ cost = BASE_COST;
+ edit_distance_t deletion = v_next[j] + BASE_COST;
+ edit_distance_t insertion= v_one_ago[j + 1] + BASE_COST;
edit_distance_t substitution = v_one_ago[j] + cost;
edit_distance_t cheapest = MIN (deletion, insertion);
cheapest = MIN (cheapest, substitution);
if (i > 0 && j > 0 && s[j] == t[i - 1] && s[j - 1] == t[i])
{
- edit_distance_t transposition = v_two_ago[j - 1] + 1;
+ edit_distance_t
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
> "David" == David Malcolm writes:
>> I tested this using the self-tests. A new self-test is also
>> included.
> Did the full DejaGnu testsuite get run? There are a lot of tests in it
> that make use of this code.
I didn't try it, but I can.
> The patch should probably update the leading comment to
> get_edit_distance.
Will do.
>> test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("foo", "FOO", 3);
[...]
> If I'm reading things correctly, the patch here updates the existing
> tests to apply the BASE_COST scale factor, but I don't think it adds
> any direct checks of the cost of case-conversion. It would be good to
> add those.
It isn't obvious but the foo/FOO test did change.
Tom
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 5:06 PM David Malcolm wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-05-30 at 13:40 +, Pip Cet via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > I think we should just omit the triangle inequality test from the
> > self-test, as in the attached patch.
>
> I like the idea,
Thanks!
> but can you update the comment so that it explains why
> it's not a metric? (better to capture that in a comment in the source
> rather than just in the mailing list archives).
How's this?
From 2a759aba3639dd782c28c727746c0e6913390fa6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pip Cet
Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 13:39:09 +
Subject: [PATCH] Don't test the triangle inequality in the spellcheck.c
self-test.
* spellcheck.c (test_data): Add problematic strings.
(test_metric_conditions): Don't test the triangle inequality
condition, which our distance function does not satisfy.
---
gcc/ChangeLog| 6 ++
gcc/spellcheck.c | 22 --
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index 4fc37369d39..e565d8ecadf 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2020-05-30 Pip Cet
+
+ * spellcheck.c (test_data): Add problematic strings.
+ (test_metric_conditions): Don't test the triangle inequality
+ condition, which our distance function does not satisfy.
+
2020-05-28 Nicolas Bértolo
* Makefile.in: don't look for libiberty in the "pic" subdirectory
diff --git a/gcc/spellcheck.c b/gcc/spellcheck.c
index 7891260a258..ab17657e8dc 100644
--- a/gcc/spellcheck.c
+++ b/gcc/spellcheck.c
@@ -438,13 +438,17 @@ static const char * const test_data[] = {
"food",
"boo",
"1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890"
+ "abc",
+ "ac",
+ "ca",
};
/* Verify that get_edit_distance appears to be a sane distance function,
- i.e. the conditions for being a metric. This is done directly for a
- small set of examples, using test_data above. This is O(N^3) in the size
- of the array, due to the test for the triangle inequality, so we keep the
- array small. */
+ even though it doesn't satisfy the conditions for being a metric. (This
+ is because the triangle inequality fails to hold: the distance between
+ "ca" and "ac" is 1, and so is the distance between "abc" and "ac", but
+ the distance between "abc" and "ca" is 3. Algorithms that calculate the
+ true Levenshtein-Damerau metric are much more expensive.) */
static void
test_metric_conditions ()
@@ -468,16 +472,6 @@ test_metric_conditions ()
edit_distance_t dist_ji
= get_edit_distance (test_data[j], test_data[i]);
ASSERT_EQ (dist_ij, dist_ji);
-
- /* Triangle inequality. */
- for (int k = 0; k < num_test_cases; k++)
- {
- edit_distance_t dist_ik
- = get_edit_distance (test_data[i], test_data[k]);
- edit_distance_t dist_jk
- = get_edit_distance (test_data[j], test_data[k]);
- ASSERT_TRUE (dist_ik <= dist_ij + dist_jk);
- }
}
}
}
--
2.27.0.rc0
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
On Sat, 2020-05-30 at 13:40 +, Pip Cet via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:21 PM Pip Cet wrote: > > IIRC, minimum string alignment does not satisfy the triangle > > inequality anyway, so test_metric_conditions should probably not > > pretend to test it... > > I did remember correctly, though of course that should have been > "optimal string alignment" :-). If you change the spellcheck.c > test_data array to include "abc", "ac", and "ca", the self-test will > fail, even without your patch. > > I think we should just omit the triangle inequality test from the > self-test, as in the attached patch. I like the idea, but can you update the comment so that it explains why it's not a metric? (better to capture that in a comment in the source rather than just in the mailing list archives). Thanks Dave
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 10:54 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> I got this error message when editing gcc and recompiling:
>
> ../../gcc/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/decl.c:7714:39: error:
> ‘DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_all’ was not declared in this scope; did you
> mean ‘DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_GDB’?
> 7714 | = debug_info && gnat_encodings ==
> DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_all;
> | ^~~
> ~
> | DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_GD
> B
>
> This suggestion could be improved -- what happened here is that I
> failed to upper-case the word, and DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_ALL was the
> correct spelling.
>
> This patch changes gcc's spell checker to prefer simple case changes
> when possible.
Thanks. I like the overall idea.
> I tested this using the self-tests. A new self-test is also
> included.
Did the full DejaGnu testsuite get run? There are a lot of tests in it
that make use of this code.
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * spellcheck.c (CASE_COST): New define.
> (BASE_COST): New define.
> (get_edit_distance): Recognize case changes.
> (get_edit_distance_cutoff): Update.
> (test_edit_distances): Update.
> (get_old_cutoff): Update.
> (test_find_closest_string): Add case sensitivity test.
> ---
> gcc/spellcheck.c | 114 ++---
> --
> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/gcc/spellcheck.c b/gcc/spellcheck.c
> index 7891260a258..9002617453f 100644
> --- a/gcc/spellcheck.c
> +++ b/gcc/spellcheck.c
[...snip...]
The patch should probably update the leading comment to
get_edit_distance.
> @@ -228,47 +241,50 @@ test_get_edit_distance_both_ways (const char
> *a, const char *b,
> static void
> test_edit_distances ()
> {
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("", "nonempty", strlen
> ("nonempty"));
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("saturday", "sunday", 3);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("foo", "m_foo", 2);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("hello_world", "HelloWorld", 3);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("", "nonempty",
> + BASE_COST * strlen ("nonempty"));
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("saturday", "sunday",
> + BASE_COST * 3);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("foo", "m_foo", BASE_COST * 2);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("hello_world", "HelloWorld", 4);
>test_get_edit_distance_both_ways
> -("the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog", "dog", 40);
> +("the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog", "dog", BASE_COST
> * 40);
>test_get_edit_distance_both_ways
> ("the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog",
> "the quick brown dog jumps over the lazy fox",
> - 4);
> + BASE_COST * 4);
>test_get_edit_distance_both_ways
> ("Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit,",
> "All your base are belong to us",
> - 44);
> + BASE_COST * 44);
>test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("foo", "FOO", 3);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("fee", "deed", 2);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("coorzd1", "coordx1", 2);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("assert", "sqrt", 3);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("PATH_MAX", "INT8_MAX", 3);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("time", "nice", 2);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("bar", "carg", 2);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("fee", "deed", BASE_COST * 2);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("coorzd1", "coordx1", BASE_COST
> * 2);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("assert", "sqrt", BASE_COST *
> 3);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("PATH_MAX", "INT8_MAX",
> BASE_COST * 3);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("time", "nice", BASE_COST * 2);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("bar", "carg", BASE_COST * 2);
>test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("gtk_widget_show_all",
> - "GtkWidgetShowAll", 7);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("m_bar", "bar", 2);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("MACRO", "MACRAME", 3);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("ab", "ac", 1);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("ab", "a", 1);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("a", "b", 1);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("nanl", "name", 2);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("char", "bar", 2);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("-optimize", "fsanitize", 5);
> - test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("__DATE__", "__i386__", 4);
> + "GtkWidgetShowAll", 10);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("m_bar", "bar", BASE_COST * 2);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("MACRO", "MACRAME", BASE_COST *
> 3);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("ab", "ac", BASE_COST * 1);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("ab", "a", BASE_COST * 1);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("a", "b", BASE_COST * 1);
> + test_get_edit_distance_both_ways
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:21 PM Pip Cet wrote:
> IIRC, minimum string alignment does not satisfy the triangle
> inequality anyway, so test_metric_conditions should probably not
> pretend to test it...
I did remember correctly, though of course that should have been
"optimal string alignment" :-). If you change the spellcheck.c
test_data array to include "abc", "ac", and "ca", the self-test will
fail, even without your patch.
I think we should just omit the triangle inequality test from the
self-test, as in the attached patch.
From bbb8b5cd7368f471bcbdbe451591e74315a5adcd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pip Cet
Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 13:39:09 +
Subject: [PATCH] Don't test the triangle inequality in the spellcheck.c
self-test.
* spellcheck.c (test_data): Add problematic strings.
(test_metric_conditions): Don't test the triangle inequality
condition, which our distance function does not satisfy.
---
gcc/ChangeLog| 6 ++
gcc/spellcheck.c | 19 +--
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index 4fc37369d39..e565d8ecadf 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2020-05-30 Pip Cet
+
+ * spellcheck.c (test_data): Add problematic strings.
+ (test_metric_conditions): Don't test the triangle inequality
+ condition, which our distance function does not satisfy.
+
2020-05-28 Nicolas Bértolo
* Makefile.in: don't look for libiberty in the "pic" subdirectory
diff --git a/gcc/spellcheck.c b/gcc/spellcheck.c
index 7891260a258..1d2df070445 100644
--- a/gcc/spellcheck.c
+++ b/gcc/spellcheck.c
@@ -438,13 +438,14 @@ static const char * const test_data[] = {
"food",
"boo",
"1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890"
+ "abc",
+ "ac",
+ "ca",
};
/* Verify that get_edit_distance appears to be a sane distance function,
- i.e. the conditions for being a metric. This is done directly for a
- small set of examples, using test_data above. This is O(N^3) in the size
- of the array, due to the test for the triangle inequality, so we keep the
- array small. */
+ even though it doesn't satisfy the conditions for being a metric. This
+ is done directly for a small set of examples, using test_data above. */
static void
test_metric_conditions ()
@@ -468,16 +469,6 @@ test_metric_conditions ()
edit_distance_t dist_ji
= get_edit_distance (test_data[j], test_data[i]);
ASSERT_EQ (dist_ij, dist_ji);
-
- /* Triangle inequality. */
- for (int k = 0; k < num_test_cases; k++)
- {
- edit_distance_t dist_ik
- = get_edit_distance (test_data[i], test_data[k]);
- edit_distance_t dist_jk
- = get_edit_distance (test_data[j], test_data[k]);
- ASSERT_TRUE (dist_ik <= dist_ij + dist_jk);
- }
}
}
}
--
2.27.0.rc0
Re: [PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:02 PM Tom Tromey wrote: > This patch changes gcc's spell checker to prefer simple case changes > when possible. > > I tested this using the self-tests. A new self-test is also included. I think that's great, but it should be mentioned in the comment that the distance function used is not the Damerau-Levenshtein distance, and not a metric. (No triangle inequality. For example, the distance between "aB" and "ba" is 4, but the distance between "aB" and "ab" is 1 and that between "ab" and "ba" is 2, unless I missed something very clever in your code.) IIRC, minimum string alignment does not satisfy the triangle inequality anyway, so test_metric_conditions should probably not pretend to test it...
[PATCH] Prefer simple case changes in spelling suggestions
I got this error message when editing gcc and recompiling:
../../gcc/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/decl.c:7714:39: error:
‘DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_all’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean
‘DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_GDB’?
7714 | = debug_info && gnat_encodings == DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_all;
| ^~~~
| DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_GDB
This suggestion could be improved -- what happened here is that I
failed to upper-case the word, and DWARF_GNAT_ENCODINGS_ALL was the
correct spelling.
This patch changes gcc's spell checker to prefer simple case changes
when possible.
I tested this using the self-tests. A new self-test is also included.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* spellcheck.c (CASE_COST): New define.
(BASE_COST): New define.
(get_edit_distance): Recognize case changes.
(get_edit_distance_cutoff): Update.
(test_edit_distances): Update.
(get_old_cutoff): Update.
(test_find_closest_string): Add case sensitivity test.
---
gcc/spellcheck.c | 114 ++-
1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/spellcheck.c b/gcc/spellcheck.c
index 7891260a258..9002617453f 100644
--- a/gcc/spellcheck.c
+++ b/gcc/spellcheck.c
@@ -25,6 +25,12 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
#include "spellcheck.h"
#include "selftest.h"
+/* Cost of a case transformation. */
+#define CASE_COST 1
+
+/* Cost of another kind of edit. */
+#define BASE_COST 2
+
/* Get the edit distance between the two strings: the minimal
number of edits that are needed to change one string into another,
where edits can be one-character insertions, removals, or substitutions,
@@ -47,9 +53,9 @@ get_edit_distance (const char *s, int len_s,
}
if (len_s == 0)
-return len_t;
+return BASE_COST * len_t;
if (len_t == 0)
-return len_s;
+return BASE_COST * len_s;
/* We effectively build a matrix where each (i, j) contains the
distance between the prefix strings s[0:j] and t[0:i].
@@ -67,7 +73,7 @@ get_edit_distance (const char *s, int len_s,
/* The first row is for the case of an empty target string, which
we can reach by deleting every character in the source string. */
for (int i = 0; i < len_s + 1; i++)
-v_one_ago[i] = i;
+v_one_ago[i] = i * BASE_COST;
/* Build successive rows. */
for (int i = 0; i < len_t; i++)
@@ -83,21 +89,28 @@ get_edit_distance (const char *s, int len_s,
/* The initial column is for the case of an empty source string; we
can reach prefixes of the target string of length i
by inserting i characters. */
- v_next[0] = i + 1;
+ v_next[0] = (i + 1) * BASE_COST;
/* Build the rest of the row by considering neighbors to
the north, west and northwest. */
for (int j = 0; j < len_s; j++)
{
- edit_distance_t cost = (s[j] == t[i] ? 0 : 1);
- edit_distance_t deletion = v_next[j] + 1;
- edit_distance_t insertion= v_one_ago[j + 1] + 1;
+ edit_distance_t cost;
+
+ if (s[j] == t[i])
+ cost = 0;
+ else if (TOLOWER (s[j]) == TOLOWER (t[i]))
+ cost = CASE_COST;
+ else
+ cost = BASE_COST;
+ edit_distance_t deletion = v_next[j] + BASE_COST;
+ edit_distance_t insertion= v_one_ago[j + 1] + BASE_COST;
edit_distance_t substitution = v_one_ago[j] + cost;
edit_distance_t cheapest = MIN (deletion, insertion);
cheapest = MIN (cheapest, substitution);
if (i > 0 && j > 0 && s[j] == t[i - 1] && s[j - 1] == t[i])
{
- edit_distance_t transposition = v_two_ago[j - 1] + 1;
+ edit_distance_t transposition = v_two_ago[j - 1] + BASE_COST;
cheapest = MIN (cheapest, transposition);
}
v_next[j + 1] = cheapest;
@@ -185,11 +198,11 @@ get_edit_distance_cutoff (size_t goal_len, size_t
candidate_len)
/* If the lengths are close, then round down. */
if (max_length - min_length <= 1)
/* ...but allow an edit distance of at least 1. */
-return MAX (max_length / 3, 1);
+return BASE_COST * MAX (max_length / 3, 1);
/* Otherwise, round up (thus giving a little extra leeway to some cases
involving insertions/deletions). */
- return (max_length + 2) / 3;
+ return BASE_COST * (max_length + 2) / 3;
}
#if CHECKING_P
@@ -228,47 +241,50 @@ test_get_edit_distance_both_ways (const char *a, const
char *b,
static void
test_edit_distances ()
{
- test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("", "nonempty", strlen ("nonempty"));
- test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("saturday", "sunday", 3);
- test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("foo", "m_foo", 2);
- test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("hello_world", "HelloWorld", 3);
+ test_get_edit_distance_both_ways ("", "nonempty",
+
