GNU bug report logs - #25107
Patches to clean up ispell.el

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 25107 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 25107 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: bug-emacs <bug-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Patches to clean up ispell.el
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2016 17:10:42 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

The attached patch series is mostly aimed at removing XEmacs-specific code,
which is not needed, since our version of ispell.el has been part of GNU
Emacs for some time, and is not imported from upstream (the most recent
upstream release was over 20 years ago). Similarly, some workarounds for
older versions of GNU Emacs are removed (since ispell.el is not distributed
separately); in any case, most of the workarounds seem to pertain to GNU
Emacs pre-version 21.

The pre-VCS change history is also removed by the patch.

This clean-up series is aimed at making things neat before I add enchant
support (bug #17742), which will be a very simple change.

One patch also removes the pre-GNU Emacs maintainer information, so that
attentive users (who read the source!) do not mistakenly try to file bug
reports &c. with the original upstream.

I have supplied the patches as a series for ease of reading, but could
compress them if desired for installation in Emacs git.

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

[0002-Remove-ispell.el-pre-GNU-Emacs-comments.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0003-Assume-we-have-version-for-checking-ispell-version.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0004-Remove-unused-ispell-looking-back.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0005-Remove-tests-for-built-in-functions.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0006-Generalise-over-specific-documentation.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0007-Remove-some-XEmacs-specific-code-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0008-Assume-Emacs-supports-alpha-in-regexps.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0009-Remove-XEmacs-and-old-Emacs-highlighting-code.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0010-Remove-some-commented-out-code.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0011-Remove-XEmacs-specific-code-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0012-Remove-XEmacs-specific-code-dealing-with-enable-mult.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0013-Remove-XEmacs-specific-horizontal-scrollbar-handling.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0014-Remove-XEmacs-specific-minibuffer-handling-code-from.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0015-Remove-remaining-mentions-of-XEmacs-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2016 22:11:25 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Attached, a new patchset which fixes a typo in one of the previous patches
and adds a few more.

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

[0002-Remove-ispell.el-pre-GNU-Emacs-comments.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0003-Assume-we-have-version-for-checking-ispell-version.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0004-Remove-unused-ispell-looking-back.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0005-Remove-tests-for-built-in-functions.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0006-Generalise-over-specific-documentation.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0007-Remove-some-XEmacs-specific-code-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0008-Assume-Emacs-supports-alpha-in-regexps.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0009-Remove-XEmacs-and-old-Emacs-highlighting-code.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0010-Remove-some-commented-out-code.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0011-Remove-XEmacs-specific-code-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0012-Remove-XEmacs-specific-code-dealing-with-enable-mult.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0013-Remove-XEmacs-specific-horizontal-scrollbar-handling.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0014-Remove-XEmacs-specific-minibuffer-handling-code-from.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0015-Remove-remaining-mentions-of-XEmacs-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0016-Remove-support-for-old-versions-of-supercite-and-GNU.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0017-Remove-unused-constant.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0018-Remove-support-for-ispell-3.1.12.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0019-Remove-boundp-test-for-always-bound-symbol.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0020-Remove-meaningless-defconst-ispell-version.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0021-Remove-XEmacs-specific-ispell-with-no-warnings.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #11 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 21:38:16 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

​Attached, ​an updated patch set which fixes a couple of bugs I found, and
adds one more patch to remove an unused variable.

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

[0002-Remove-ispell.el-pre-GNU-Emacs-comments.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0003-Assume-we-have-version-for-checking-ispell-version.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0004-Remove-unused-ispell-looking-back.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0005-Remove-tests-for-built-in-functions.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0006-Generalise-over-specific-documentation.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0007-Remove-some-XEmacs-specific-code-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0008-Assume-Emacs-supports-alpha-in-regexps.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0009-Remove-XEmacs-and-old-Emacs-highlighting-code.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0010-Remove-some-commented-out-code.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0011-Remove-XEmacs-specific-code-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0012-Remove-XEmacs-specific-code-dealing-with-enable-mult.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0013-Remove-XEmacs-specific-horizontal-scrollbar-handling.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0014-Remove-XEmacs-specific-minibuffer-handling-code-from.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0015-Remove-remaining-mentions-of-XEmacs-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0016-Remove-support-for-old-versions-of-supercite-and-GNU.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0017-Remove-unused-constant.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0018-Remove-support-for-ispell-3.1.12.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0019-Remove-boundp-test-for-always-bound-symbol.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0020-Remove-meaningless-defconst-ispell-version.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0021-Remove-XEmacs-specific-ispell-with-no-warnings.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0022-Remove-unused-variable.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #14 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 17:51:05 +0200

> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 21:38:16 +0000
> 
> ​Attached, ​an updated patch set which fixes a couple of bugs I found, and adds one more patch to remove an
> unused variable.

Thanks, I have a few comments:

> From b2311cf687ec0af8da1c1c4df46255ebbd334e66 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2016 13:55:31 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH 06/23] Generalise over-specific documentation
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> 
> * lisp/textmodes/ispell.el (ispell-personal-dictionary): Rather than
> document precise personal wordlist filenames for only two supported
> spelling checkers, simply say that the default personal dictionary
> depends on the chosen spelling checker.  The user can check the
> spelling checker’s documentation if necessary.  This is simpler, and
> works for other supported (and future, or unknown) spelling checkers.

Why is it useful to remove this information?  The documentation of the
spell-checkers themselves leaves a lot to be desired, so asking the
users to go consult it might not be appreciated.  I'd rather add here
the missing info about the other spellers.

> From 01e9de80ebf42180a63f8021f754820334cc1fa1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2016 21:58:00 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH 20/23] Remove meaningless defconst ispell-version
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> 
> * lisp/textmodes/ispell.el (ispell-version): Since ispell.el is now
> firmly part of Emacs, and the version hasn’t changed since 2003, and
> isn’t used anywhere, remove it.  3rd-party code can better use the
> Emacs version, or feature or function checks.

I agree, but instead of removing the information, how about replacing
it with the Emacs version?  Something like "ispell.el from Emacs %s".

The rest of the patch is fine with me.  Please wait for a few more
days before pushing, to give people time to comment.

Message #17 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 16:20:24 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 6 December 2016 at 15:51, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

>
> Why is it useful to remove this information?  The documentation of the
> spell-checkers themselves leaves a lot to be desired, so asking the
> users to go consult it might not be appreciated.  I'd rather add here
> the missing info about the other spellers.
>

​Emacs is enough for us to document without trying to document third-party
software. Since all the software involved is free, better to fix it
directly, and benefit all its users, rather than take on the burden of
documenting it in order only to benefit Emacs users.

If you can point out specific deficiencies in spellcheckers, I'm quite
happy to file suitable documentation patches with them.​ For example, the
man page for hunspell seems clear enough:

The default dictionary depends on the locale settings. The following
environment variables are searched: LC_ALL, LC_MESSAGES, and LANG. If none
are set then the default personal dictionary is $HOME/.hunspell_default.
Setting -d or  the DICTIONARY environmental variable, personal dictionary
will be $HOME/.hunspell_dicname

I find the documentation for GNU aspell a little less obvious, as it
requires the user to understand:

The personal dictionary generally has a filename of the form:

     .aspell.LANG.pws

and put this together with the "home-dir" setting to realise that the
default is "~/.aspell.LANG.pws".

The documentation for ispell is a bit clearer:

If neither the -p switch nor the WORDLIST environment variable is given,
ispell will search for a personal dictionary in both the current directory
and $HOME, creating one in $HOME if none is found. The preferred name is
constructed by appending ".ispell_" to the base name of the hash file.


In summary, it seems that a patch to the man page for aspell (as being the
first place users are likely to look) would be helpful. If you have other
suggestions, I can look into them.

> * lisp/textmodes/ispell.el (ispell-version): Since ispell.el is now
> > firmly part of Emacs, and the version hasn’t changed since 2003, and
> > isn’t used anywhere, remove it.  3rd-party code can better use the
> > Emacs version, or feature or function checks.
>
> I agree, but instead of removing the information, how about replacing
> it with the Emacs version?  Something like "ispell.el from Emacs %s".
>

The context is an interactive call to ispell-check-version, which reports
what version of the spell-checker is being used. If the user wishes to know
what version of Emacs they are running, they can check emacs-version. When
ispell.el was third-party code, knowing the version of ispell.el separately
made sense, e.g. for bug reports. Now, one would use report-emacs-bug,
which already includes the Emacs version; ispell-check-version, used
interactively, is now primarily useful for diagnosing problems with the
external spell-checker. (In general, having a diagnostic report the Emacs
version seems redundant unless there's a good reason: for example, if the
information is being transmitted outside Emacs, as is the case with
report-emacs-bug.)

​As you ask (and in light of the recent emacs-devel discussion you copied
to me), I'll give others the opportunity to respond before installing
anything.

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #20 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 18:37:03 +0200

> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 16:20:24 +0000
> Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
>  Why is it useful to remove this information? The documentation of the
>  spell-checkers themselves leaves a lot to be desired, so asking the
>  users to go consult it might not be appreciated. I'd rather add here
>  the missing info about the other spellers.
> 
> ​Emacs is enough for us to document without trying to document third-party software. Since all the software
> involved is free, better to fix it directly, and benefit all its users, rather than take on the burden of documenting
> it in order only to benefit Emacs users.

I agree with the general point, but in this case we are talking about
mentioning a small number of file names in the doc string.  Doesn't
seem like a burden to me, and whoever put that information there
probably didn't see it as such, either.

>  > * lisp/textmodes/ispell.el (ispell-version): Since ispell.el is now
>  > firmly part of Emacs, and the version hasn’t changed since 2003, and
>  > isn’t used anywhere, remove it. 3rd-party code can better use the
>  > Emacs version, or feature or function checks.
> 
>  I agree, but instead of removing the information, how about replacing
>  it with the Emacs version? Something like "ispell.el from Emacs %s".
> 
> The context is an interactive call to ispell-check-version, which reports what version of the spell-checker is
> being used. If the user wishes to know what version of Emacs they are running, they can check
> emacs-version.

I was thinking about someone using the result to report the version
they have, e.g. as part of a bug report.

Message #23 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 17:46:23 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 6 December 2016 at 16:37, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 16:20:24 +0000
> > Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> >  Why is it useful to remove this information? The documentation of the
> >  spell-checkers themselves leaves a lot to be desired, so asking the
> >  users to go consult it might not be appreciated. I'd rather add here
> >  the missing info about the other spellers.
> >
> > ​Emacs is enough for us to document without trying to document
> third-party software. Since all the software
> > involved is free, better to fix it directly, and benefit all its users,
> rather than take on the burden of documenting
> > it in order only to benefit Emacs users.
>
> I agree with the general point, but in this case we are talking about
> mentioning a small number of file names in the doc string.  Doesn't
> seem like a burden to me, and whoever put that information there
> probably didn't see it as such, either.
>

​In that case I will add the information for Enchant. At least it is not
likely to change.​

I'm not saying it is much of a burden, but it is the sort of small burden
that can contribute to death-by-a-thousand-cuts. I guess we disagree over
what the threshold is; in this case I'm quite happy to cede that none of
the locations we mention is likely to change as all the spellcheckers
documented there are mature.

I was thinking about someone using the result to report the version
> they have, e.g. as part of a bug report.
>

​​Version of what? If of Emacs, then that version information is already
provided by report-emacs-bug. If of a spellchecker, then that information
is still provided by the revised message.

Sorry if I'm overlooking something obvious here!​

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #26 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 20:01:50 +0200

> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 17:46:23 +0000
> Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
>  I agree with the general point, but in this case we are talking about
>  mentioning a small number of file names in the doc string. Doesn't
>  seem like a burden to me, and whoever put that information there
>  probably didn't see it as such, either.
> 
> ​In that case I will add the information for Enchant. At least it is not likely to change.​

Sure, that's what I meant.

>  I was thinking about someone using the result to report the version
>  they have, e.g. as part of a bug report.
> 
> ​​Version of what? If of Emacs, then that version information is already provided by report-emacs-bug. If of a
> spellchecker, then that information is still provided by the revised message.

It's admittedly a minor issue, but just to make myself clear: I
thought about reporting the version not as part of report-emacs-bug.

Or let me ask this: why does ispell-version at all exist?  Perhaps I'm
confused about its purpose.

Message #29 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 18:11:16 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 6 December 2016 at 18:01, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 17:46:23 +0000
> > Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> >  I agree with the general point, but in this case we are talking about
> >  mentioning a small number of file names in the doc string. Doesn't
> >  seem like a burden to me, and whoever put that information there
> >  probably didn't see it as such, either.
> >
> > ​In that case I will add the information for Enchant. At least it is not
> likely to change.​
>
> Sure, that's what I meant.
>
> >  I was thinking about someone using the result to report the version
> >  they have, e.g. as part of a bug report.
> >
> > ​​Version of what? If of Emacs, then that version information is already
> provided by report-emacs-bug. If of a
> > spellchecker, then that information is still provided by the revised
> message.
>
> It's admittedly a minor issue, but just to make myself clear: I
> thought about reporting the version not as part of report-emacs-bug.
>
> Or let me ask this: why does ispell-version at all exist?  Perhaps I'm
> confused about its purpose.
>

​My understanding is that it exists for reporting bugs in the combination
of ispell.el and whatever spell checker you are using. When ispell.el was
distributed as third-party code, there were extra two useful pieces of
information: the version of the spell-checker program, and the version of
ispell.el.

Now, there is just one extra piece of information, the version of the
spell-checker program.

One would presumably also want the version of Emacs in a bug report, but we
don't print this out all over the place; we provide the convenience of
report-emacs-bug, and otherwise expect users to put it manually in the
report.

​So, emacs-version does not substitute for the old ispell.el version; the
old ispell.el version has simply become unnecessary, and I've removed it.
The Emacs version is still needed for a bug report, but there's no reason
that ispell.el (or any other core package) should show emacs-version
specially, when there are already user-friendly ways to automatically put
it in bug reports.​

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #32 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 20:41:04 +0200

> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 18:11:16 +0000
> Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
>  Or let me ask this: why does ispell-version at all exist? Perhaps I'm
>  confused about its purpose.
> 
> ​My understanding is that it exists for reporting bugs in the combination of ispell.el and whatever spell checker
> you are using. When ispell.el was distributed as third-party code, there were extra two useful pieces of
> information: the version of the spell-checker program, and the version of ispell.el.

Sorry, I goofed: I meant ispell-check-version, the command, when
invoked interactively -- what is its purpose?  It sounds like you are
saying it no longer has any purpose as a command, is that true?

Message #35 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 21:58:15 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 6 December 2016 at 18:41, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 18:11:16 +0000
> > Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> >  Or let me ask this: why does ispell-version at all exist? Perhaps I'm
> >  confused about its purpose.
> >
> > ​My understanding is that it exists for reporting bugs in the
> combination of ispell.el and whatever spell checker
> > you are using. When ispell.el was distributed as third-party code, there
> were extra two useful pieces of
> > information: the version of the spell-checker program, and the version
> of ispell.el.
>
> Sorry, I goofed: I meant ispell-check-version, the command, when
> invoked interactively -- what is its purpose?  It sounds like you are
> saying it no longer has any purpose as a command, is that true?
>

​I goofed in a complementary way: I gave an answer about
ispell-check-version, whose purpose is now (as far as I can see) to give
the version of ​the spell-checker program (i.e. aspell, hunspell etc.) for
use in bug reports, or other diagnostic purposes.

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #38 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 00:55:55 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

One final update to this patch series: I added a patch to remove support
for aspell < 0.60 (released in 2004).

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

[0002-Remove-ispell.el-pre-GNU-Emacs-comments.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0003-Assume-we-have-version-for-checking-ispell-version.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0004-Remove-unused-ispell-looking-back.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0005-Remove-tests-for-built-in-functions.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0006-Generalise-over-specific-documentation.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0007-Remove-some-XEmacs-specific-code-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0008-Assume-Emacs-supports-alpha-in-regexps.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0009-Remove-XEmacs-and-old-Emacs-highlighting-code.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0010-Remove-some-commented-out-code.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0011-Remove-XEmacs-specific-code-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0012-Remove-XEmacs-specific-code-dealing-with-enable-mult.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0013-Remove-XEmacs-specific-horizontal-scrollbar-handling.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0014-Remove-XEmacs-specific-minibuffer-handling-code-from.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0015-Remove-remaining-mentions-of-XEmacs-from-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0016-Remove-support-for-old-versions-of-supercite-and-GNU.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0017-Remove-unused-constant.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0018-Remove-support-for-ispell-3.1.12.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0019-Remove-boundp-test-for-always-bound-symbol.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0020-Remove-meaningless-defconst-ispell-version.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0021-Remove-XEmacs-specific-ispell-with-no-warnings.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0022-Remove-unused-variable.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0023-Minor-docstring-and-comment-fixes-to-ispell.el.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0024-Remove-support-for-aspell-0.60-from-2004.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #41 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 18:29:09 +0200

> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 00:55:55 +0000
> Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> One final update to this patch series: I added a patch to remove support for aspell < 0.60 (released in 2004).

Any difference from the last time that would justify reading these
again?

Thanks.

Message #44 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 19:07:40 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 13 December 2016 at 16:29, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> > Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 00:55:55 +0000
> > Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> > One final update to this patch series: I added a patch to remove support
> for aspell < 0.60 (released in 2004).
>
> Any difference from the last time that would justify reading these
> again?
>

​Only the one new patch (the last in the series).

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #47 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 21:29:59 +0200

> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 19:07:40 +0000
> Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
>  > One final update to this patch series: I added a patch to remove support for aspell < 0.60 (released in
>  2004).
> 
>  Any difference from the last time that would justify reading these
>  again?
> 
> ​Only the one new patch (the last in the series).

That one is fine with me, thanks.

Message #50 received at 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25107: Acknowledgement (Patches to clean up ispell.el)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 19:45:15 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 13 December 2016 at 19:29, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
> > Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 19:07:40 +0000
> > Cc: 25107 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> >  > One final update to this patch series: I added a patch to remove
> support for aspell < 0.60 (released in
> >  2004).
> >
> >  Any difference from the last time that would justify reading these
> >  again?
> >
> > ​Only the one new patch (the last in the series).
>
> That one is fine with me, thanks.
>

​Great! I have pushed the patch series.​

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #55 received at 25107-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: 25107-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 19:45:55 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.