Poll

Should we remove the spellchecker from Wedge?

YES!!!
30 (83.3%)
No, but replace pspell with support for enchant.
1 (2.8%)
No, my English-speaking community loves it.
3 (8.3%)
No, my non-English-speaking community loves it.
2 (5.6%)
Total Members Voted: 33

MultiformeIngegno

  • Posts: 1,337
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #75, on March 5th, 2013, 01:20 AM »
It needs to be removed IMO. Every OS/browser natively supports spell checking, so it's not needed and adds extra space  :)

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #76, on March 5th, 2013, 01:24 AM »
Quote from MultiformeIngegno on March 5th, 2013, 01:20 AM
It needs to be removed IMO. Every OS/browser natively supports spell checking, so it's not needed and adds extra space  :)
Except IE without a plugin.
When we unite against a common enemy that attacks our ethos, it nurtures group solidarity. Trolls are sensational, yes, but we keep everyone honest. | Game Memorial

MultiformeIngegno

  • Posts: 1,337

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #78, on March 5th, 2013, 01:32 AM »
There's still a lot of XP users who can't get IE 9 let alone 10 ;)

MultiformeIngegno

  • Posts: 1,337
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #79, on March 5th, 2013, 01:34 AM »
I know... but what's the share of people using XP AND IE AND desperately needing spell checking? :P

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #80, on March 5th, 2013, 01:38 AM »
Haha, you got me, it is pretty slim. Slim enough that we could safely drop it :)

Allan

  • It's all Good
  • Liking wedge
  • Posts: 26
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #81, on March 5th, 2013, 04:22 PM »
I used to use spell check alot, but with it built in to most browsers the need on forums is not necessary anymore.
Free Hosting and software Advertisement Host Hunters

Dragooon

  • I can code! Really!
  • polygon.com has to be one of the best sites I've seen recently.
  • Posts: 1,841
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #82, on March 5th, 2013, 06:25 PM »
I don't really use spell check...so screw it :P
The way it's meant to be

nolsilang

  • Lurking <i class=
  • Posts: 106
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #83, on March 5th, 2013, 07:04 PM »
never used it too :D

Dismal Shadow

  • Madman in a Box
  • Me: Who is Arantor? Cleverbot: It stands for time and relative dimensions in space.
  • Posts: 1,185
“I will stand on my ground as an atheist until your god shows up...If my irreligious bothers you much, and if you think everything I do is heresy to your god I don't care. Heresy is for those who believe, I don't. So, it isn't heresy at all!


   Jack in, Wedge,
   EXECUTE!

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #85, on March 6th, 2013, 01:40 AM »
The spell checker wouldn't tell you that anyway... ;) Neither pspell nor enchant can do that.

Mind you, there is one side use of the spell check that I do want to bring up, and that is the 'Did you mean...' feature. If you haven't noticed it, do a search but misspell one of the words. You'll get a 'You may have meant <alternative>' message.

Doing away with the spell checker can mean doing away with that too.

Just a thought.

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,078
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #86, on March 6th, 2013, 11:28 AM »
I didn't forget about that feature :)
And I like it, although it has a very high failure rate at offering 'sensible' words to search for.

My view of it is that we could keep this specific feature, because it's only used in Search2.php anyway, and get rid of the rest. Maybe also implement support for enchant for that one, too..?

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #87, on March 6th, 2013, 02:07 PM »
It has a very high failure rate because it has no awareness of what's in the database, and I'm not inclined to keep it because of that high failure rate.

Now, there is one way we can fix that, at major DB space cost: by logging what words are actually in the database. It's a similar sort of idea to the search index but instead of storing hashes (which you can't look up against) you also store the actual words in use, and can do comparisons against that reasonably well.

The problem is, it's a major space killer and performance is going to be fairly poor. I personally would rather just ditch the whole thing entirely.

MultiformeIngegno

  • Posts: 1,337
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #88, on March 6th, 2013, 04:43 PM »
+1 for complete ditch

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Spell checker
« Reply #89, on March 6th, 2013, 09:31 PM »
So far I've removed the main guts of the spell checker, it's only the integration into the search system left. I guess I could commit what I have and not worry about that bit for now - we can always remove it later easily enough.
Posted: March 6th, 2013, 09:11 PM

Though, looking back, I'd prefer to strip it entirely, so that I could get rid of the dictionary info from inside the language files.