mIRC Home    About    Download    Register    News    Help

Print Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
Spell Check #90371 13/07/04 11:39 PM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
J
Jundas Offline OP
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
OP Offline
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
J
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
For the love of whatever deities you worship please add a spellchecker into this program. Years of translating people's typos have reduced my ability to distinguish actual words from gibberish!


I’m going mad I beg of you please intricate this feature anyway you can!

Re: Spell Check #90372 14/07/04 12:18 AM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 66
C
Cyrex Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
C
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 66
I honestly hope this does not get implemented. I despise spell checkers. mIRC is an IRC client, not a word processor. On top of that, there are many spell checker scripts out there on the internet.

Re: Spell Check #90373 14/07/04 12:23 AM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
J
Jundas Offline OP
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
OP Offline
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
J
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
The only thing you have to fear from a spellchecker is the reduction of bash.org posts.

Re: Spell Check #90374 14/07/04 12:51 AM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
M
Mentality Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
M
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
Unfortunately there are just too many reasons NOT to have this in mIRC - I highly recommend using the search feature at the top of the forum to find out just some of the points that have been mentioned before. Expand to 'Feature Suggestions' and 'All Posts'.

Some issues that have been raised in the past:
- Different languages - how should mIRC interpret them? Special characters?
- The time it would take to compile all of the world's dictionaries into mIRC.
- Abbreviations - distinguishing between 'lmao', 'rofl' and so on.
- It wouldn't increase people's ability to spell, it would just have a machine do it for them.
- Different types of English - UK/US have different spellings, some completely different words.
- Typos are an acceptable part of the IRC world and are just a part of what makes IRC....IRC smirk

At this time I find it unlikely mIRC will have a spell checker put in. There are addons out there which have a go at it - check some of then out here.

Regards,


Mentality/Chris
Re: Spell Check #90375 14/07/04 03:04 AM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 187
S
Soul_Eater Offline
Vogon poet
Offline
Vogon poet
S
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 187
Quote:
mIRC is an IRC client, not a word processor


It's also not a gaming system, yet people make games for it. They also make 'notepads', and mp3 players, when its an IRC client. Should /splay be removed from mIRC too?

Re: Spell Check #90376 14/07/04 03:09 AM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 742
MTec89 Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 742
1f 7h15 15 1mpl1m3n73d 7h3n 1 c4n7 5p33k 1337!!!111!!!! what is wrong with you man!!! badd idea!!! :tongue:

or:

[11:11] <nick 1> what was that code again?
[11:13] <nick 2>
[11:11] * Spell checker found an error in your sentance. "if ($mode = no) { echo hah }" is not recognized by the mIRC internal Spell checking dictionary, therefore was not sent. Correct your error and try again.

Last edited by MTec89; 14/07/04 03:16 AM.

http://MTec89Net.com
irc.freenode.net #MTec89Net
Re: Spell Check #90377 14/07/04 03:36 AM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 66
C
Cyrex Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
C
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 66
Quote:

It's also not a gaming system, yet people make games for it. They also make 'notepads', and mp3 players, when its an IRC client. Should /splay be removed from mIRC too?


Exactly, they make those things. Just like they can make a spell checker... I mean, those things you named aren't built into mIRC, so why should a spell checker be built in? It can easily be scripted, or someone could just download a script...

If all those things were going to be built into mIRC, why not just make mIRC a full fledged operating system?

Re: Spell Check #90378 14/07/04 03:52 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
E
electrik Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
E
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
You, Mentality, obviously have no idea what you are talking about. All of the issues you mentioned, are not issues at all. There are many programs out there that have spellchecking capabilities. One of my favorites, is gaim, and instant messenging client that highlights incorrect words if aspell is installed. If aspell is not installed, then the spellchecker does not work. It's completely optional. Now of course, there's no way for mIRC to keep an internal dictionary of all the languages, so that is not an option at all. Aspell has dictionaries available in every language, and it is also open source/freeware. It is very easy for other programs to access its capabilities. First the user installs the program, then installs the dictionary of his/her language, and it's as easy as that. Let me go through your points one by one to correct your mistakes.

Quote:
- Different languages - how should mIRC interpret them? Special characters?


As stated before, aspell will highlight incorrect spelling according to the user's dictionary.

Quote:
- The time it would take to compile all of the world's dictionaries into mIRC.


I believe this statement has already been destupified.

Quote:
- Abbreviations - distinguishing between 'lmao', 'rofl' and so on.


As long as mIRC only highlights the word, this should not be a problem. Otherwise, words can be added to the dictionary very easily.

Quote:
- It wouldn't increase people's ability to spell, it would just have a machine do it for them.


This may not be true, when they see a mispelled word, chances are they'll try and correct it. And if it were to be done automatically, that's fine also. It at least would make it legible for other readers.

Quote:
- Different types of English - UK/US have different spellings, some completely different words.


This is easily fixed by the user downloading the correct dictionary for his language.

Quote:
- Typos are an acceptable part of the IRC world and are just a part of what makes IRC....IRC


IRC is not a place for lazy ignoramuses, IRC is a gateway to communicating with people from around the world. And spelling is a crucial part of written communication.

Good day.

edit: Aspell can be seen at http://aspell.sourceforge.net/

Re: Spell Check #90379 14/07/04 05:31 AM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
J
Jundas Offline OP
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
OP Offline
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
J
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
A full fledged...what are you talking about....

I’m not trying to get mIRC to run my email client and my MMO games I’m using it to chat.

Maybe you don’t understand what I’m saying here.

Spellchecker, as an option, that uses external dictionary files, which can point out typos in a non-intrusive manner (underline…highlight...change colour).

It wouldn’t make any large increase in files size. Dictionary files are available so all you have to do is use one from your native tongue. If you want a word in the dictionary file you just add it.

It wouldn’t interfere with any typos or l33t speak you intentionally provided because it wouldn’t change text unless told to…wouldn’t even beep or pause you with a message box.

You seem to be very heated over the addition of something that could only improve the chatting experience, mind if I ask why?


Re: Spell Check #90380 14/07/04 05:33 AM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
J
Jundas Offline OP
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
OP Offline
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
J
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
That sounds almost exactly what mIRC needs.

Re: Spell Check #90381 14/07/04 08:50 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 788
C
Coolkill Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
C
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 788
More than likely the only way mIRC would support spell checking would be to 'borrow' it using COM's from another application, i.e. MSWord, and for this to happen, as one might expect MSWord must be installed.

Failing MSWord being installed mIRC would then need to connect to some dictionary website of some sort to check the words which would be unreasonable to expect.

And, failing that mIRC would need to come packaged with a nice big dictionary which i'm guessing no-ones going to like.

Eamonn.

Re: Spell Check #90382 14/07/04 09:46 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,984
Watchdog Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,984
The problem with using Word's dictionary is that alot of people don't change it to suit their own country's version of English. At any rate Micro$oft still get it wrong. I personally like the idea of a spellchecker that can actually spell, though at the other end of the spectrum it is pointless having one if either the dictionary is wrong or user settings are not accurate.

All up, mIRC really doesn't need one. It is easy to script a small one for commonly mispelled words like "teh" (the), etc. It'd be a good way of putting a 'talker' script to some good use.


Induced IRC
irc.induced.net
Re: Spell Check #90383 14/07/04 11:18 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,962
S
starbucks_mafia Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
S
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,962
I doubt it would use the method you've described. It would, as you said, require MS Word to be installed, it would also be very resource intensive (because MS Word is) and would be very slow having to load up at least a portion of MS Word in order to implement this, most likely the entire program - anyone using a system a couple of years old will know that MS Word is a slow starter. Instead it would make much more sense to use a purpose-built dictionary/spell-checker library, the obvious choice being Aspell as electrik said.


Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
Re: Spell Check #90384 14/07/04 11:51 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 266
Z
zack Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
Z
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 266
A spell checker would be absolutely superb, but how it would be implemented for the end user is a difficult question.

When a user types a message, does it auto-check each word and alert of errors in real time, or does it display a dialog when Enter is pressed and displays all errors? Automation feature? As with the threat of killer automative robots, an automatic spell checker replacer could cause havoc (who's had fun with MSWord autocomplete?).

Don't get me wrong, it's a great idea, and put into mIRC wouldn't be that hard with electrik's suggestion of Aspell. I'm just worried about how it will be used in the end. Maybe we'll see it has a major feature with lots of options to satify the majority of users.


You won't like it when I get angry.
Re: Spell Check #90385 14/07/04 12:14 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
M
Mentality Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
M
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
Hey there,

Firstly, please don't be rude to me, there is no need for it - insulting my intelligence was unnecessary, there are better ways to get your point across.

Secondly, the points I made in that post are a summary of issues that have been mentioned by other people in other spell checking threads, not ones that I have concocted. I did point this out in that post, you must have missed that particular sentence.

Good day.

Regards,


Mentality/Chris
Re: Spell Check #90386 14/07/04 12:26 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 788
C
Coolkill Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
C
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 788
I agree with you that MSword is a slow starter, but that doesnt stop it from being an alternative.

i.e.


alias speltright {
if (!$com(spellcheck)) { comopen spellcheck Word.Application }
if (!$comerr) {
var %b = $com(spellcheck,CheckSpelling,3,bstr,$1-)
var %c = $com(spellcheck).result
}
return $iif(%c,* Correct Spelling,* Incorrect Spelling)
}

alias closespell { .comclose spellcheck }


//echo - $speltright(Your Text)

Granted, yes, it keeps MSword open in the background for the duration but it works, and after the word is open, it works pretty much instantly and closespell could be called On Exit.

Adding a little, GetSpellingSuggestions call would also get you alternatives to your mistakes.

Eamonn.

Re: Spell Check #90387 14/07/04 02:40 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
E
electrik Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
E
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
I wasn't being rude to you, I was just correcting you.

And in response to my good friend zack, the way gaim does it (which is the best way in my opinion), is that while you're typing, when you hit the spacebar, thus signifying the beginning of a new word, it checks to previous word, and if it is mispelled, it turns the mispelled word red and underlined. It doesn't prompt you to fix it, or do anything else obstrusive.

And with the addition of the 'multi-byte editbox' in one of the recent versions, I do not believe it would be too difficult to turn mispelled words red and underlined.

Re: Spell Check #90388 14/07/04 03:27 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 266
Z
zack Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
Z
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 266
After the world has appeared as incorrect, then perhaps a system similar to the CTRL+K dialog can be done (with a option to enable/disable it of course). That could work quite well.


You won't like it when I get angry.
Re: Spell Check #90389 14/07/04 05:02 PM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 701
K
Kelder Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
K
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 701
I'll try to limit myself to actual arguments instead of ad hominem remarks.

-> Different languages: Maybe for english speakers it's difficult to grasp, but there are really many different languages. In Belgium there are 3 official languages, and if you have something remotely to do with Internet you also use English. So which language would you set in mIRC?

-> Dialects: On IRC, dialects, regional or spoken language are used a lot. In Dutch there is a difference between written language and IRC language. Yes it's not correct, but it is widely accepted. There are still errors (typo's and incorrect grammar for some things), but some errors are intentional for a more fluent or natural message.
I have never seen a spell checker that works perfectly with this language, I might even look at it for 2 seconds...

-> "This may not be true, when they see a mispelled word, chances are they'll try and correct it"
No, chances are they'll get annoyed by that wavy red line stuff and get a client that doesn't act like a school teacher.

-> Spell checkers suck: they often give wrong output, both overlooking errors and marking errors where there are none. Same for proper names, nick names and stuff like that. I'm not going to add hundred different nicknames to have a rather clean looking mIRC.

-> mIRC is a chat program; not a spelling teacher. (If you want it to be both, go to next point)

And now the important stuff:
-> You can script it. Use com objects or code a dll and have it check the text with on INPUT events, or make your own dialogs or whatever. You apparently already have all the dictionaries you need... You can even write on @*:TEXT*:#:if ($dll(check.dll,check,$1-)) kick # $nick My eyes hurt because of you. Do note that I won't be rejoining your channel.

Re: Spell Check #90390 14/07/04 06:41 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
D
DekuHaze Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
D
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
I personally don't see what the big deal is. I'm a GAIM user too and I think its spell-checker feature is handy - it's not intrusive and it's not annoying. If you still don't like it, simply disable the ability to use it in the preferences! Sheesh.

Anyways, now to address some of the arguements...

Quote:
-> Different languages: Maybe for english speakers it's difficult to grasp, but there are really many different languages. In Belgium there are 3 official languages, and if you have something remotely to do with Internet you also use English. So which language would you set in mIRC?


Ok, multi-lingual users could be a problem. I think perhaps having the ability to specify the language of the particular channel/private chat would be handy. Perhaps some kind of drop-down menu somewhere. Or, in the mIRC preferences, a list box which allows you to select multiple languages, based on the dictionaries that are already installed or, if none are installed, mIRC could download the dictionaries which are needed from the aspell/ispell/gtkspell websites.

Quote:
-> Dialects: On IRC, dialects, regional or spoken language are used a lot. In Dutch there is a difference between written language and IRC language. Yes it's not correct, but it is widely accepted. There are still errors (typo's and incorrect grammar for some things), but some errors are intentional for a more fluent or natural message.
I have never seen a spell checker that works perfectly with this language, I might even look at it for 2 seconds...


Fo this one, I think the only viable solution is to either add the custom words to the dictionary or just plain ignore them.

Quote:
-> "This may not be true, when they see a mispelled word, chances are they'll try and correct it"
No, chances are they'll get annoyed by that wavy red line stuff and get a client that doesn't act like a school teacher.


Then disable the feature.

Quote:
-> Spell checkers suck: they often give wrong output, both overlooking errors and marking errors where there are none. Same for proper names, nick names and stuff like that. I'm not going to add hundred different nicknames to have a rather clean looking mIRC.


I personally have NEVER had a spell checker suggest the wrong word to me or an incorrect spelling. Grammar checkers, on the other hand, are a different story. As for nicknames, perhaps mIRC can be set so that any words in the nicklist are not checked.

Sure, the feature can be scripted but then so can most features...

Re: Spell Check #90391 15/07/04 02:35 AM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
J
Jundas Offline OP
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
OP Offline
Nutrimatic drinks dispenser
J
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5
"You, Mentality, obviously have no idea what you are talking about."

That was a bit hostile.

Can you offer up any of your own opinions on this subject Mentality? You seem to think this suggetion is a waste, but the only issues you raise are easily answered quotes. I really would like to hear a good reason mIRC shouldn't have a spellchecker option...I've come up with one but I'm not sure I want to share.

Re: Spell Check #90392 15/07/04 12:59 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
M
Mentality Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
M
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
The issue of rudeness has been taken up in private message, that's the end of that topic.

I don't think any suggestion is a waste, I'm grateful to all people who offer up suggestions. The points I raised, as I have said, are not my own but ones I've gathered from the other threads that talk about spell checkers. Nevertheless, I agree with many of those points and whilst I don't think the person who posted has wasted their time, and I have no idea what Khaled's feelings are about the issue, I don't personally agree with having a spell checker put into mIRC.

Firstly, something was said about downloading dictionaries? And where are they to be downloaded from? The mIRC website? Ok, so there are people who have problems writing their nickname into a text box in mIRC Options, and now they are expected to download a dictionary, I assume put it in their mIRC directory and somehow load it into mIRC, then enable the dictionary. Oh yes, I can see the forum threads already. No matter how easy you make it people will have issues - they've installed the wrong dictionary, they don't understand how to do it etc.

And adding words to the dictionary so that it doesn't pick them up? I can see people loving having to do that. The average abbreviations used by IRCers, sure, but I know plenty of people who use 'u', 'pls' and so forth in their normal typing - they aren't kiddy newbie chatters, they're quite experienced IRCers, a lot of them adults, some of them opers on big networks. And what about onomatopoeia? Written sounds like 'pft', 'hehehehe'. What if one day you type 'heheh' and 'pffttt'. Do you need to add every variation you're every going to use?

And what about people who chat in more than one language? I know a lot of people who speak Swedish AND English. Filipino AND English. Is mIRC meant to improve their spelling for both languages? What if there are conflicts with similar words? Some people can speak fluently in 4, sometimes 5 (sometimes more!) languages and I'm sure they do so via IRC - what if they want to use the spell checker for all languages? Or are they to be forced only to use one? The suggestion that was offered up for this seems like a long and tedious workaround. Setting a different dictionary for different private chats/channels? What about channels which allow BOTH languages to be spoken and someone regularly uses BOTH languages in a channel? For example, #mIRC on Quakenet allows German and English. #Help on DALnet allows help in absolutely any language.

This seems like another IM client suggestion like the smileys were. mIRC isn't an IM client, if you really want it to be there are DLLs and addons out there that you can use to bring those features in.

IRC is written communication indeed, but it is not formal. You don't have to type a formal essay every time you speak. I don't see this improving the quality of chat and I don't see this improving the quality of spelling for those that really need it. I mean really, the only 'illiterate' people I come across are people from countries such as Kuwait or Malaysia that have a lot of difficulty speaking English - they aren't going to benefit from a spell checker as more often than not most humans can't work out what some people are saying, let alone a dictionary that hasn't got a brain!

My 2 cents.

Regards,


Mentality/Chris
Re: Spell Check #90393 15/07/04 01:51 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
D
DekuHaze Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
D
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
Quote:
Firstly, something was said about downloading dictionaries? And where are they to be downloaded from? The mIRC website? Ok, so there are people who have problems writing their nickname into a text box in mIRC Options, and now they are expected to download a dictionary, I assume put it in their mIRC directory and somehow load it into mIRC, then enable the dictionary. Oh yes, I can see the forum threads already. No matter how easy you make it people will have issues - they've installed the wrong dictionary, they don't understand how to do it etc.


Why can't this be automatic? You select the dictionaries you want and when the choices have been confirmed, the dictionaries are auto-installed. Nice and easy.

Quote:
And adding words to the dictionary so that it doesn't pick them up? I can see people loving having to do that. The average abbreviations used by IRCers, sure, but I know plenty of people who use 'u', 'pls' and so forth in their normal typing - they aren't kiddy newbie chatters, they're quite experienced IRCers, a lot of them adults, some of them opers on big networks. And what about onomatopoeia? Written sounds like 'pft', 'hehehehe'. What if one day you type 'heheh' and 'pffttt'. Do you need to add every variation you're every going to use?


Adding words to the dictionary would of course be entirely optional, not manditory. If you choose not to do this and you don't like the words still being highlighted, disable the feature.

Quote:
And what about people who chat in more than one language? I know a lot of people who speak Swedish AND English. Filipino AND English. Is mIRC meant to improve their spelling for both languages? What if there are conflicts with similar words? Some people can speak fluently in 4, sometimes 5 (sometimes more!) languages and I'm sure they do so via IRC - what if they want to use the spell checker for all languages? Or are they to be forced only to use one? The suggestion that was offered up for this seems like a long and tedious workaround. Setting a different dictionary for different private chats/channels? What about channels which allow BOTH languages to be spoken and someone regularly uses BOTH languages in a channel? For example, #mIRC on Quakenet allows German and English. #Help on DALnet allows help in absolutely any language.


Why can't multiple dictionaries used be in conjunction with each other? Spell checkers only check each individual word that you type against what it has in it's pre-defined list of words. Why can't it compare each word that is typed against multiple lists of words and if said word is NOT found in any of them, mark it as an error.

Quote:
IRC is written communication indeed, but it is not formal.


Correct, IRC isn't formal - but some people still like to take accuracy in what it is they are trying to communicate. I, for one, am a member of this particular type of people and see nothing wrong with communicate as clearly as possible.

I'm still not seeing where the problem with this suggestion lies. If implamented a la GAIM, it will ONLY highlight the errors of text in the text box, and not the buffer. There will be no masses of squiggly lines everywhere, no annoying boxes popping up all over the place telling you you can't spell and no restriction which says you can't turn it off. It really is a genuinely useful feature. Why so much negativity about it, people?

Re: Spell Check #90394 15/07/04 02:15 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
M
Mentality Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
M
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
Quote:
Why can't this be automatic? You select the dictionaries you want and when the choices have been confirmed, the dictionaries are auto-installed. Nice and easy.


Select them from where? The installation dialog? You expect that to list 200+ languages and for a user to find their specific one? Perhaps select them from a drop down list....and then how many drop down lists should be available to choose from in the case of someone wanting to install multiple dictionaries?

And erm, since when has mIRC ever asked for feature settings in the installation dialog. Bah.

Quote:
Adding words to the dictionary would of course be entirely optional, not manditory. If you choose not to do this and you don't like the words still being highlighted, disable the feature.


Just disable it? But what about people who WANT the feature, but don't want it to affect certain words but can't be bothered to add 100 words to the dictionary? Just disabling the dictionary if it were implemented is hardly an option. I don't see many threads on this board saying 'Oh well, you're having difficulties with that option so just switch it off'.

Quote:
Why can't multiple dictionaries used be in conjunction with each other?


Words in different languages could quite easily conflict. 'Salut' in French may be interpreted by an English dictionary as 'Salute'. How should the dictionaries react? Is the person meaning to say 'Salut' in French of have they spelt 'Salute' incorrectly? Perhaps they should just disable the feature smirk

Quote:
but some people still like to take accuracy in what it is they are trying to communicate.


I would say most people couldn't care less. If it's intelligible then there isn't really an issue, is there? If it's not intelligible chances are a spell checker is not going to help the person. Why should such a major feature be incorporated for what I would say is the minority of IRCers who are so pedantic they think 'pls' is the end of TEH world.

Quote:
Why so much negativity about it, people?


Read the last 2 paragraphs in my last post which are still the icing on the cake for me, even if every problem above is answered to its full extent.

Regards,


Mentality/Chris
Re: Spell Check #90395 15/07/04 02:50 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
D
DekuHaze Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
D
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
Quote:
Select them from where? The installation dialog?


Select from the mIRC options. The list of languages could be presented in a list box that allows for multiple items to be selected. Never said anything about the mIRC installer...

Quote:
You expect that to list 200+ languages and for a user to find their specific one?


Yes. Why not?
People do it for their word processors, people do it on websites which ask your geographical location when you register for whatever service that site provide and there's probably numerous other places too where this happens. Why should it be such a problem for mIRC users to pick their languages from an alphabetically-sorted list? Are people so inept that they can't handle that?

Quote:
Just disable it? But what about people who WANT the feature, but don't want it to affect certain words but can't be bothered to add 100 words to the dictionary? Just disabling the dictionary if it were implemented is hardly an option. I don't see many threads on this board saying 'Oh well, you're having difficulties with that option so just switch it off'.


Well what possibilities are there? Let's see:
1) Add the word to the dictionary via a text field in the mIRC options desiged for this purpose.
2) Don't add the word to the dictionary and live with the fact the occasional word gets turned red in your text box before you send out the line of text. If this is the desired choice, don't moan about it because you're too lazy to amend your dictionary via the mIRC options.
3) Disable the spell checker.

Quote:
Words in different languages could quite easily conflict. 'Salut' in French may be interpreted by an English dictionary as 'Salute'. How should the dictionaries react? Is the person meaning to say 'Salut' in French of have they spelt 'Salute' incorrectly? Perhaps they should just disable the feature


Since the word is in one of the dictionaries, it wouldn't respond. In such a sitution, you'd have to use your own personal judgement.

Quote:
I would say most people couldn't care less. If it's intelligible then there isn't really an issue, is there? If it's not intelligible chances are a spell checker is not going to help the person.


But the whole point of the spell checker is to check YOUR spelling, not other peoples. Why would you yourself be writing unintelligable words?!

Quote:
Why should such a major feature be incorporated for what I would say is the minority of IRCers who are so pedantic they think 'pls' is the end of TEH world.


Another advantage to a spell checker (which my friend brought up) is that it possibly could be advantageous to those who may be learning another language and would like to be able to communicate with it effectively. And please don't snipe at me. I'm not pedantic and I certainly don't see 'plz' as the end of the world. I just prefer my own personal text to be perfectly legible.

Quote:
Read the last 2 paragraphs in my last post which are still the icing on the cake for me, even if every problem above is answered to its full extent.


You've not really outlined any serious problems that could not be answered with a little bit of serious thought. I still see no good reason why this cannot be added besides the "it's too IM-like" complaint.

Re: Spell Check #90396 15/07/04 10:36 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
M
Mentality Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
M
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
Although those issues still haven't been answered to their full extent I really can't be bothered to fill another thread up with 5 pages of useless answering back. So, just to quote the last part:

Quote:
I still see no good reason why this cannot be added besides the "it's too IM-like" complaint.


Firstly, I still see no reason why it should be incorporated just a bunch of reasons how it could be. Secondly, the final paragraph of the post I referred you to mentions nothing of an IM client. The final paragraph contains a reason as to why I see little or no point in having this dictionary.

TBH, if it was included (provided it was off by default) I wouldn't care a great deal I just don't think such a thing belongs in an IRC client. If the original argument is taken, that being "I'm sick of correcting typos", as I've said, a spell checker isn't going to help any.

Regards,


Mentality/Chris
Re: Spell Check #90397 15/07/04 11:04 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 28
P
puterfixer Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
P
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 28
Yes, some people love accuracy and correctness - and they learn to type. Millions of foreigners can do it; why wouldn't a native be able to speak and type in his own language perfectly (or at least with one mistake every 1,000 words, for example)? The ones who can't tell the difference between "mandatory" and "manditory" won't care if their typing is right or wrong. Writing a built-in spell checker for a communication environment based on getting the message through quickly while disregarding quality, is simply a waste of human resources. You should use a spell checker for your work, for writing your resume, for academic work, even if you know that you make one mistake in 100,000 words. The fact that people created add-ons for mIRC to turn it into an e-mail checker or multimedia player is simply an example of the power of the scripting language. If one feels like it, he could write a mIRC script to replace the industrial computers controlling the robots in a car factory. This doesn't mean that such a feature is normal for an IRC client. Neither is e-mail checking and multimedia players, there are specialized tools for that.

Extending this application beyond its scope will only turn it into a strange piece of software, like mixing up the genes of a sheep, a shark, a parrot and a cactus just to see what could come up. It is silly to request users to use correct language on IRC, even that some people would very much like to see those abbreviations or nonsense gone from their screens (me included). However, it is stupid to force users to do so - see how much you can determine people not to use excessive colors in channels. And, it is a waste of time to implement something that is not desired or needed by the majority of the users; there are other things on the "to do" list, which have more supporters than the idea of a spell checker.

Remember what happened when Khaled decided to change the "nag screen" on start-up from being displayed once every 30 days to being displayed on each start-up, if the user didn't enter a valid license key. People gave up the improvements and bugs fixed because all they understood was that "I have to pay for the new version, the old one is free." The Options entry moved from the File menu to Tools menu was an annoyance to many people, and so were other minor changes between versions. What would happen if people found out the new version prevents them from sending messages as they did for years, or annoys them with underlined words they mistyped, or even makes chatting feel like writing a document for work? They use IRC to chat free of any restraints, to express themselves creatively, to relax. Throw in a restriction which directly affects the purpose of chatting, and you've got a serious problem.

No offense intended, just speaking my mind.

Re: Spell Check #90398 16/07/04 12:34 AM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
D
DekuHaze Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
D
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
Mentality: The reason it should be incorporated is pretty self-explanitory, isn't it? To point out spelling errors.

Also, it is correct the final paragraph of your last-but-one post didn't mention IM at all. I am aware of this. However, you did reference IM clients in the post before that.

Puterfixer:

Quote:
They use IRC to chat free of any restraints, to express themselves creatively, to relax. Throw in a restriction which directly affects the purpose of chatting, and you've got a serious problem.


As I've stated before, the spell checker would not be restrictive. It would merely, if enabled, highlight a misspelled word in red in the editbox before you send it out to channel. That is all it does. People seem to get so wound up over the smallest of things *rolls eyes*

Here is a graphical demonstration. Would this really be such a bad thing? shocked

Re: Spell Check #90399 16/07/04 12:49 AM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
M
Mentality Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
M
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
What I am saying is, what benefit is gained from pointing out spelling errors? (Re: below)

The post I referred to did mention IM clients but the second paragraph said the following:

"I don't see this improving the quality of chat and I don't see this improving the quality of spelling for those that really need it. I mean really, the only 'illiterate' people I come across are people from countries such as Kuwait or Malaysia that have a lot of difficulty speaking English - they aren't going to benefit from a spell checker as more often than not most humans can't work out what some people are saying, let alone a dictionary that hasn't got a brain!"

Are you telling me you really think having a spell checker will improve the quality of people's typing? How is a dictionary supposed to help someone who says: "Hai how r u? a/s/l?" or "lolzy 10x". These are the kind of people that are unbearable to talk with. I hardly think it's necessary to start incorporating something like this for someone who, using puterfixer's example, spells mandatory 'manditory'. That doesn't improve anything. It's not worth it, there are far more important features to be working on in my opinion.

Anyway, that's enough of my contributions to this thread heh, I guess Khaled has got both sides of the 'story' as it were, we'll see in future versions to come I guess :-)

Regards,


Mentality/Chris
Re: Spell Check #90400 16/07/04 12:50 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 28
P
puterfixer Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
P
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 28
Our opinions are different, each person has its own preferences, which is understandable. Let's try to look at this discussion from an objective point of view. Before starting any project, it's a good idea to run a fesability study to understand what is the ratio between the work involved in it and its final usefulness. Has anyone conducted a thorough research on several IRC networks, to see how many people would be interested in using this feature and how many do not find it necessary? I doubt Khaled will be willing to dedicate a few weeks to this enhancement when only .5% of mIRC users will keep it activated. If there are no studies to indicate that such a feature is likely to be used by a lot of people, then it's pointless to get it started.

Re: Spell Check #90401 16/07/04 01:03 AM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
D
DekuHaze Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
D
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 384
Mentality:

Quote:
I hardly think it's necessary to start incorporating something like this for someone who, using puterfixer's example, spells mandatory 'manditory'.


Unless I have missed something, this is precisely the reason for a spell checker.

Quote:
Are you telling me you really think having a spell checker will improve the quality of people's typing?


Of course it will. If you are in doubt of this, please disable the spell checker in your word processor and see how well you get on.

Puterfixer:

A feasability study? I don't fancy surveying all of the mIRC users on every IRC network. However, I do believe polls can be created in this forum - but that's in the hands of the moderators.

Re: Spell Check #90402 16/07/04 01:24 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
E
electrik Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
E
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
Quote:
Are you telling me you really think having a spell checker will improve the quality of people's typing?


Yes, if people do not know that the way they spell a word is wrong, how will they ever know to change it. Believe it or not, IRC is one of the best ways to learn how to type properly. Unfortunately, it is one of the best ways to learn to type poorly as well. If people, both new to IRC, and people who have been using it since the Dark Ages, start to increase their typing accuracy, it will be beneficial to them (the user), for obvious reasons.

Quote:
I hardly think it's necessary to start incorporating something like this for someone who, using puterfixer's example, spells mandatory 'manditory'.


The person who spells mandatory 'manditory' will have learned something from his IRC client, instead of letting his brain rot away on the Internet.

Quote:
It's not worth it, there are far more important features to be working on in my opinion.


Can you name any that aren't related to scripting. Personally, I don't make scripts in mIRC. I actually use it as a chat client. I would like to see features that benefit me, as the non-scripter user, when new versions are released. (Yes, i do hang out in #mircscripts.org, but no, I seriously don't script)

edit: Furthermore, this would actually be a selling point for me to buy mIRC. It's one thing that no other client I know of, besides one I am in the proccess of building in phpgtk, incorporates.

Re: Spell Check #90403 16/07/04 07:42 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
E
electrik Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
E
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
Before I respond to puterfixer's post, I have a theory on what has turned this thread into such a spat war. This suggestion is a Spell Checker, not a Spell Fixer. In my opinion, the best way that this could be implemented is if it:
  1. was able to be toggled on and off. This would have to be the case, as everyone would not want to download and install aspell with their native dictionary.
  2. could use multiple dictionaries at the same time, for people chat in both English, and Spanish for example. I am not sure if aspell supports multiple dictionaries, so maybe an option to turn aspell off for certain channels, like you can turn logging off for certain channels.
  3. did not fix your spelling automatically for you.
  4. did not popup any spelling suggestions
  5. had a way to change the formatting of a mispelled word. instead of turning it red and underlined, maybe turn it bold.
  6. had an easy way to add words to the dictionary. I would suggest actually adding it to mirc.ini as not to 'corrupt' the dictionary with mispelled words, like lol, rofl, etc.


Furthermore, I do not think it would actually take too much work to implement this. Since aspell/pspell is open source, there is many references to learn from, if need be. I know in other languages, this could be done in a matter of a few lines of code. Of course, this is just my view on it, I really have no idea since I am not familiar with C++, or the mIRC source code obviously. But since Mr. Mardam-Bey recently added the 'multi-byte' edit box, the text formatting for a mispelled word would not be a problem I do not imagine. Now to reply to puterfixer...

Quote:
Writing a built-in spell checker for a communication environment based on getting the message through quickly while disregarding quality, is simply a waste of human resources.


IRC was not based on getting a message through quickly while disregarding quality. IRC, along with email, which I despise, has become a means of communication where spelling and grammar (thus quality) is, for some reason, forgotten. How annoying is it when someone sends you an email that is completely void of any punctuation, thus turning it into one long run-on sentence?

Quote:
The fact that people created add-ons for mIRC to turn it into an e-mail checker or multimedia player is simply an example of the power of the scripting language. If one feels like it, he could write a mIRC script to replace the industrial computers controlling the robots in a car factory. This doesn't mean that such a feature is normal for an IRC client. Neither is e-mail checking and multimedia players, there are specialized tools for that.

Extending this application beyond its scope will only turn it into a strange piece of software, like mixing up the genes of a sheep, a shark, a parrot and a cactus just to see what could come up.



Now I'm really not sure what you were trying to get at, but I do not think adding a spell validator to a program in which is used for typing is really that far fetched.

Quote:
It is silly to request users to use correct language on IRC, even that some people would very much like to see those abbreviations or nonsense gone from their screens (me included).


How you type on IRC portrays an enormous amount about yourself. The people that this wouldn't help out are the people who mispell words on purpose, but then again, there is nothing that could help them out.

Quote:
However, it is stupid to force users to do so - see how much you can determine people not to use excessive colors in channels.


No one is being forced to type correctly. This would be a non-intrusive spell checker. So non-intrusive, that, from what has been suggested by myself and others, shouldn't even offer suggestions. All it does is notify you of mispelled words with some sort of text-formatting in the editbox whilst you type.

Quote:
And, it is a waste of time to implement something that is not desired or needed by the majority of the users; there are other things on the "to do" list, which have more supporters than the idea of a spell checker.


I think you'd be surprised at the number of people who would think it'd be a good idea. I do not keep up to date with the "to-do" list, but I imagine the "to-do" list is filled with things to benefit scripters, not people like me who use mIRC solely to chat with.

Quote:
What would happen if people found out the new version prevents them from sending messages as they did for years, or annoys them with underlined words they mistyped, or even makes chatting feel like writing a document for work?


This would in no way prevent anyone from sending messages with mispelled words. If for some reason you found you did not want mIRC to notify you of mispelled words, simply turn it off. Furthermore, people would not "just find out" as soon as they opened mIRC that it "annoys" them with mispelled words. They would have to go to aspell.net and download aspell and their dictionary. This feature would not work without them.

Quote:
They use IRC to chat free of any restraints, to express themselves creatively, to relax.


Not all people use IRC to relax, some actually do business with it. Some people actually use it to learn. When I join a help channel requesting help with something, php for example, I do my best to organize my thoughts, including spelling and grammar, cleanly and efficiently. People, including myself, would much rather help someone who sounds professional than someone who enters a channel and immediately starts spewing out jibberish.

Quote:
Throw in a restriction which directly affects the purpose of chatting, and you've got a serious problem.


Remember, there would be a way to turn it on and off. And also if they didn't want a spellchecker, they probably wouldn't have downloaded the dictionary.

These are my thoughts on the matter, and coupled with Jundas and DekuHaze make a rather convincing argument in my opinion on why this is a good suggestion. Basically, I have come to the conclusion that, if you do not want mIRC to check your spelling, don't enable, or disable the option, or don't even download the dictionaries, and you have nothing to worry about.

Re: Spell Check #90404 16/07/04 07:53 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,984
Watchdog Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,984
People, including myself, would much rather help someone who sounds professional than someone who enters a channel and immediately starts spewing out jibberish.

I am indifferent to it all. I am yet to enter a room and find that the conversation is totally compliant with English as Shakespeare knew it. I think overuse of 'netspeak' is un-necessary but at the same time it doesn't kill anyone. It's a matter of to each their own.

The other thing is that a spellchecker is often also the spellfixer, as per many word processing programmes.

Blah: I nearly forgot too, there is no such thing as a dictionary that caters for every language. There's hundreds of languages in the world with tens of thousands of dialects. It'd take hundreds of years to account for them all, even if they could all be understood by the authors of the dictionaries.


Induced IRC
irc.induced.net
Re: Spell Check #90405 16/07/04 08:18 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
E
electrik Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
E
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
Quote:
Blah: I nearly forgot too, there is no such thing as a dictionary that caters for every language. There's hundreds of languages in the world with tens of thousands of dialects. It'd take hundreds of years to account for them all, even if they could all be understood by the authors of the dictionaries.


There's approximately 6000-7000 languages (including dialects) thoughout the world. Yet, I couldn't imagine there being more than 22 languages spoken a considerable amount on IRC. 99.999% of the people that chat on IRC chat in one of the following 22 or so languages. I can almost guarantee you that. People in the middle of the Sahara desert, that speak some strange tongue of clicks and snaps, simply do not have computers. Below is a list of the dictionaries aspell has on their website compiled for win32, there are others that could be compiled for win32 also I think. I tried to think of languages that aren't there to no success.

Breton | Catalan | Czech | Welsh | Danish | German | Greek | English | Esperanto | Spanish | Faroese | French | Italian | Dutch | Norwegian | Polish | Portuguese | Romanian | Russian | Slovak | Swedish | Ukrainian

Re: Spell Check #90406 16/07/04 08:28 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,984
Watchdog Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,984
There's 18 different versions of English in Windows and more notably, Office. Does Aspell cater for all of them? If not then you may then understand why I posted my original remarks near the top of the thread.


Induced IRC
irc.induced.net
Re: Spell Check #90407 16/07/04 10:53 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
E
electrik Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
E
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 29
The format of the english dict directory is as follows:
Code:
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                85 american-w-accents.alias
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                75 american.alias
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                85 british-w-accents.alias
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                75 british.alias
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                85 canadian-w-accents.alias
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                75 canadian.alias
12/21/2002  07:37 PM         4,045,824 en-only.rws
12/21/2002  07:37 PM               132 en.multi
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                72 english.alias
12/21/2002  07:37 PM           154,624 en_CA-only.rws
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                94 en_CA-w-accents.multi
12/21/2002  07:37 PM               113 en_CA.multi
12/21/2002  07:37 PM           154,624 en_GB-only.rws
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                94 en_GB-w-accents.multi
12/21/2002  07:37 PM               113 en_GB.multi
12/21/2002  07:37 PM           142,336 en_US-only.rws
12/21/2002  07:37 PM                94 en_US-w-accents.multi
12/21/2002  07:37 PM               113 en_US.multi


There's a total of 158,030 words in it, ranging from canadian english with accents to british without accents. Just because 34 people may find one word that isn't in the dictionary, doesn't mean that this isn't a worthy idea. If your thoughts were along the lines of, "It's not perfect, there'd be a few words left out", then you need to seriously reconsider every suggestion put forth in this forum. There will always be a few people you can't please. But in my honest opnion, 99.99% of the people who would use this, would get satisfactory results.

Furthermore, the tech savvy, or people who don't mind reading a put, can import their own word lists they mind find scattered here and there throughout the Internet if 158,030 isn't enough for them.

Also, one last point before it gets brought up, yes, the other language dictionaries are just as long. Actually they're longer. The English aspell dictionary was 2.3MB, whereas for example, the Spanish one is 7.0MB, and the Ukranian one is 12.0MB, while the Italian one is just 770k.

Re: Spell Check #90408 16/07/04 12:45 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 28
P
puterfixer Offline
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
P
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 28
Turning a feature on or off is not a problem to me. I've learned to use mIRC's options to suit my needs, to shape this client to the way I like it. However, for many others, an insignifiant change has a very strong impact; see the last paragraph in my first reply on this thread. That is my whole point: how many people would appreciate the new feature and try to learn to benefit from it, versus how many people will delete the new mIRC and keep the old one because it is simpler to delete than reading the documentation.

The spell checker could eventually become like the agent support; most users don't even know it's there, but the few who really find it useful will appreciate it exists. I am only concerned that, a) implementing this feature will take a lot of time and might not be justified by the number of users who will take advangate of it, and b) if things are not implemented properly (as in, the spell checker to be disabled by default), people will find it difficult to adapt to the new version.

Off-topic question: is it possible to add a spell checker in the form of an agent?

From what I've seen, most people are not going to learn anything on IRC, and especially will disregard their own typing. "What is this, English class? Get a life. It's IRC!" - I've been told more than once. People are so lazy that they will type "thx" instead of "thanks", thinking that saving 3 keystrokes has the excuse that everybody is using it. Allow me to be pessimistic about the success of the spell checker.

By the way, another thing I hate, apart from chopped words and nonsense sentences, is when others abuse the Quote function of the forum, to disect a message in tiny pieces taken out of context, then argue against them one by one. wink

Remember, this is simply a collection of opinions regarding a development suggestion, not an argument to prove the others wrong. If you want to be helpful, move on from "you can turn it off" answer which has been repeated too many times; find arguments to support your ideas. In the end, it's up to Khaled if he implements the spell checker or not; we're here to help him find the best way to approach this feature suggestion.

I have to agree that improvements to the scripting language shouldn't take that much of a priority; latest versions mostly fixed identifiers and other script-related bugs. I'd like to see other changes as well, features available to the user without the need of a script. This thread is not the place to enumerate them.

Re: Spell Check [Re: puterfixer] #199883 23/05/08 04:26 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
H
HM2K Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
H
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
You could use a halted on TABCOMP, with an aspell library (dll?)...

That's be nice to see, then it doesn't need to even be added into mIRC by default...

Re: Spell Check [Re: HM2K] #199937 24/05/08 01:53 PM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 468
symphony Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 468
You mean like this?

Re: Spell Check [Re: HM2K] #199938 24/05/08 02:13 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,010
R
RoCk Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
R
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,010

a seplkelcehcr is not ralely nedeed bsaceue we all hvae a shlcecelpker bilut rhgit idsine of our haeds ... it is mroe tahn jsut a hat rcak.

Re: Spell Check [Re: RoCk] #199943 24/05/08 05:18 PM
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,559
H
Horstl Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
H
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,559
This reminds me of:
Code:
alias mixit {
  var %input = $strip($1-), %nr = 1
  if (%input) {
    while ($gettok(%input,%nr,32)) {
      var %tok = $v1
      if ($len(%tok) > 3) { 
        var %mid = $left($mid(%tok,2),-1), %done, %new
        while ($numtok(%done,32) < $len(%mid)) {
          var %char = $rand(1,$len(%mid))
          if (!$istok(%done,%char,32)) { var %done = %done %char, %new = $+(%new,$mid(%mid,%char,1)) } 
        }
        var %tok = $+($left(%tok,1),%new,$right(%tok,1))
      }
      var %out = %out %tok
      inc %nr
    }
    if ($isid) { return %out }
    elseif ($me ison $active) { msg $v2 %out }
  }
}

Now seriously: Besides the arguments against implementing a spell checker already pointed out, especially by Kelder and Mentality, playful 'misspelling' and 'creative writing' is imho a basic part of chat culture. To me, it's part of the charm of the little funny thing called IRC. Is there an event more boring than a flawless one?

Re: Spell Check [Re: Jundas] #199987 25/05/08 01:22 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
H
HM2K Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
H
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
@symphony: sort of, except that doesn't use aspell.

@RoCk: Yes we've all seen, and know about that "rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy".

@Horstl: Arguing that a spell checker isn't needed is stupid, as people want it. It's just a question of who, when and how.

I don't think a spell checker needs to be added into mIRC (even though other clients have them built in). A decent add-on is sufficient.

I've provided the "how", it's now just a question of making aspell usable with mIRC's $dll. So it's now just a question of who and when.

Anyone good with C/C++ and understand mIRC dlls? *grin*

Re: Spell Check [Re: HM2K] #199997 25/05/08 03:02 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,010
R
RoCk Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
R
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,010

@HM2K: I wasn't trying to educate anyone.

Originally Posted By: HM2K

Arguing that a spell checker isn't needed is stupid, as people want it.


There will almost always be opposition to feature suggestions. It's expected and needed. Saying that arguing against a feature suggestion is stupid, is a stupid statement.

Re: Spell Check [Re: RoCk] #199999 25/05/08 05:25 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
H
HM2K Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
H
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
Originally Posted By: RoCk

There will almost always be opposition to feature suggestions. It's expected and needed. Saying that arguing against a feature suggestion is stupid, is a stupid statement.


Of course not. You can't argue that people don't need or want it, because people are asking for it.

The argument shouldn't be whether it's needed or not, we know people want it, it's a question of how it's going to be implemented.

ie: It does not need to be a feature of mIRC because... it can be done as an optional addon.

Re: Spell Check [Re: HM2K] #200001 25/05/08 07:26 PM
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,559
H
Horstl Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
H
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,559
Originally Posted By: HM2K
@Horstl: Arguing that a spell checker isn't needed is stupid, as people want it. It's just a question of who, when and how.
For my part, I did not argue; arguments akin/alike to those I'd bring forward have already been given (i.e. by the users I mentioned). I added an opinion.
Now, you're turning not against my pov but the argumentation of these users with... well: no argument on your part, but an opinion ("is stupid") followed by an assertion ("as people want it") without evidence or reasoning - to me, this is a spurious argument or no argument at all.

Please, return to a more constructive discussion...

Re: Spell Check [Re: Horstl] #200005 25/05/08 10:15 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
H
HM2K Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
H
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
Bold or no bold, you're arguing.

Re: Spell Check [Re: HM2K] #200006 25/05/08 10:49 PM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
A
argv0 Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
A
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
Argument or no argument, the last few posts have been pointless.

Khaled knows about the benefits of adding spell checking- he also knows about the difficulties in implementing it. Ultimately he will decide if it's worth the effort. He surely already has. He might revisit the issue sometime down the road. But if you want to implement it yourself you need not have a discussion about it here.. just go do it and come back when it's done.


- argv[0] on EFnet #mIRC
- "Life is a pointer to an integer without a cast"
Re: Spell Check [Re: argv0] #200026 26/05/08 09:43 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
H
HM2K Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
H
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
My point of being on this thread was to recruit assistance.

Last edited by HM2K; 26/05/08 09:45 AM.
Re: Spell Check [Re: HM2K] #200027 26/05/08 09:50 AM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
A
argv0 Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
A
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
Perhaps a better place would be a devoted thread in the Developer Forum, then. That would keep the intentions more clear.


- argv[0] on EFnet #mIRC
- "Life is a pointer to an integer without a cast"
Re: Spell Check [Re: argv0] #200028 26/05/08 09:52 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
H
HM2K Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
H
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
Unfortunately I don't have the authority to move this thread...

Re: Spell Check [Re: HM2K] #200029 26/05/08 09:53 AM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
A
argv0 Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
A
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
You don't need to move this thread. You just need to start a new one. This thread is for a feature suggestion in mIRC, it doesn't need to be moved anyway.


- argv[0] on EFnet #mIRC
- "Life is a pointer to an integer without a cast"
Re: Spell Check [Re: argv0] #200033 26/05/08 10:19 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80
H
HM2K Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
H
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 80

Re: Spell Check [Re: HM2K] #206357 13/11/08 06:02 PM
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3
D
DGMurdockIII Offline
Self-satisified door
Offline
Self-satisified door
D
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3
i would love to have a spellchecker in mirc

Re: Spell Check [Re: DGMurdockIII] #206362 13/11/08 07:00 PM
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 62
_
_Memo Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
_
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 62
I wouldn't mind a non-invasive in-line spellchecker, much like here in this comment box that Firefox is providing me. "spellchecker" isn't a known word, so it underlines it red. Many applications use such an approach.

I think user locale, options to change or include multiple locales, wouldn't encumber many users. If "lmao" was underlined, big deal? It's NOT a word or an abbreviation for 99% of dictionaries. Solution? Allow users to load standards following dictionary databases, override words, use a priority ranking system when using multiple databases, and etc.

I, however, wouldn't like an in-line spellchecker that offered suggestions! But if I'm spelling "separate" as "seperate" I certainly wouldn't mind it underlining the unrecognized word.

Re: Spell Check [Re: _Memo] #206433 15/11/08 06:03 AM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
A
argv0 Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
A
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
I guess your definition of invasive is a little more relaxed than mine. I find underlining words in red to be heavily invasive, especially given that a good 95% of conversations I've seen on IRC (purposefully) involve words/spellings that would never be found in a dictionary. Off the top of my head I can think of at least 1 or 2 occasions *per line* that would flag a spell checker (think 'id', 'youre', 'hes', all the obvious 'lol' stuff, and then all the geek conversations I have that involve file paths, acronyms, math formulas and plenty of code snippets <- this is typical of IRC conversations, imho). That's a lot of red underlines to be looking at. I'd rather not spend my time adding words to a dictionary when I could easily just be ignoring intentional mistakes.

Now of course some people might actually find this useful. I have a good feeling that the percentage is quite low. All I can hope is that it would not be a headache to implement should K decide to do so, should definitely *not* make "suggestions", and should definitely disable-able (because that's the first thing many would want to do).


- argv[0] on EFnet #mIRC
- "Life is a pointer to an integer without a cast"
Re: Spell Check [Re: argv0] #206661 20/11/08 04:35 AM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 333
foshizzle Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 333
just on a side note
man, lol, this is a funny topic laugh


This is not the signature you are looking for
Re: Spell Check [Re: Soul_Eater] #207476 18/12/08 10:29 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,984
Watchdog Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,984
Quote:
It's also not a gaming system, yet people make games for it. They also make 'notepads', and mp3 players, when its an IRC client.


Yeah, "people do", these functions are not built into mIRC and nor should they be. /splay is different - it doesn't require Megabytes of dictionary files and nor does it do anything but kick WMP in the guts.

UPDATE: Good Lord, I just realised how old this thread is... mad

Last edited by Watchdog; 18/12/08 10:31 AM.

Induced IRC
irc.induced.net
Re: Spell Check [Re: Jundas] #214178 21/07/09 07:50 PM
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3
D
DGMurdockIII Offline
Self-satisified door
Offline
Self-satisified door
D
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3
this would be great

Re: Spell Check [Re: argv0] #214271 27/07/09 04:39 PM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 342
M
MeStinkBAD Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
M
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 342
Originally Posted By: argv0
I guess your definition of invasive is a little more relaxed than mine. I find underlining words in red to be heavily invasive, especially given that a good 95% of conversations I've seen on IRC (purposefully) involve words/spellings that would never be found in a dictionary. Off the top of my head I can think of at least 1 or 2 occasions *per line* that would flag a spell checker (think 'id', 'youre', 'hes', all the obvious 'lol' stuff, and then all the geek conversations I have that involve file paths, acronyms, math formulas and plenty of code snippets <- this is typical of IRC conversations, imho). That's a lot of red underlines to be looking at. I'd rather not spend my time adding words to a dictionary when I could easily just be ignoring intentional mistakes.


Grow the f**k up argv... (hey look argv is non-invasively underlined). Just please stop camping in these forums spouting that every suggestion that comes along is *bad* and *unless* etc. I am sick of hearing it. I assume lot's of others are too.
You don't offer any real insight into things (much like this rant). But you have become a painful thorn in my side when viewing these forums. Blah blah I'll end this here... as this thread has possibly become off topic because of me... good now i'm mad at myself too. lol.


Beware of MeStinkBAD! He knows more than he actually does!
Re: Spell Check [Re: MeStinkBAD] #214273 27/07/09 05:58 PM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 72
P
PhireCoder Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
P
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 72
I have to say I 100% agree with you... I don't know if this arvg character just has no life or what... however if anyone's input on these forums is useless it's argv's... he has no concept as to why feature suggestion forums exist... he is not a supporter of the advancement of mIRC... all he does is slow progress down and discourage others from participating in the development process of mirc.


mIRC Scripting: So easy a caveman could do it.
Re: Spell Check [Re: Jundas] #214274 27/07/09 06:05 PM
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3
O
OriginalTux Offline
Self-satisified door
Offline
Self-satisified door
O
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3
I don't care what anybody says, I like this argv0 character. He shows no mercy.

Scenario 1:
<Feature Requester> Hey I have a feature request, ________
<argv0> What? Ugh, you can script that.

Scenario 2:
<Feature Requester> Here's my suggestion ________
<argv0> What? Screw that. That's useless dude. I wouldn't use it.

Re: Spell Check [Re: OriginalTux] #214275 27/07/09 06:09 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 218
V
vexed2 Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
V
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 218
^ faf.

Re: Spell Check [Re: OriginalTux] #214285 27/07/09 11:31 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 393
T
The_JD Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
T
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 393
Scenario 3:
bug report --> mIRC dosnt work correctly when _________ ___ _____
<Argv0> What? I don't even use that command, so you don't need to. oh, and of-course it dosn't need fixing.

Originally Posted By: vexed2
^ faf.
+1

Originally Posted By: MeStinkBAD
I am sick of hearing it. I assume lot's of others are too.
+1

I know of a few others that would +1 as well.

Last edited by The_JD; 27/07/09 11:37 PM.

[02:16] * Titanic has quit IRC (Excess Flood)
Re: Spell Check [Re: The_JD] #214286 27/07/09 11:38 PM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 72
P
PhireCoder Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
P
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 72
lmao... there could literally be a whole thread made toward argv and his uselessness to the mIRC community...


mIRC Scripting: So easy a caveman could do it.
Re: Spell Check [Re: PhireCoder] #214288 28/07/09 12:28 AM
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,559
H
Horstl Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
H
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,559
I'd hardly say I agree with argv0s conclusions or style all the time. We rather had - and will have - arguments here and there. (You'll be well aware of this if I you really read *all* the topics.)
But folks there's no reason to get personal, in any way. Some of the recent posts simply are past it.
Maybe argv0 takes an opinion for "universally valid" at times, maybe his posts appear (or are) rough at times. But there's *always* reasoning in them, and he dedicated plenty of hours to that voluntary support these very boards live on (again, every long-time user of these forums is well aware of this). He also can neither speed progress up nor "slow it down" (...none of us can).
Moreover, behold the absurdity that you're posting in this old thread because the OP of a similar feature suggestion recently added to it - after I asked him to join an existing thread to keep arguments about the feature suggestion together... *sigh*

Re: Spell Check [Re: Horstl] #214289 28/07/09 12:58 AM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 72
P
PhireCoder Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
P
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 72
Yeah... sorry for posting off topic... But I'm certainly not the first to do so... this faf has been discouraging certain mirc feature suggestions that do not pertain to his criteria of usefulness which imho makes him completely useless to these boards... and this DOES hinder the advancement of mIRC's development process because if the community feels discouraged to give feedback and suggestions to make mIRC better for all because of one's constant negative opinions and (considered to some) harassment... then people like me and the previous posters who agree have to speak up and say... Hey! This faf is ruining mine and other's desires to participate in this public forum created to make this program (mIRC) better... If you take a look at all of his posts as a whole, the only thing he seems to be dedicated to is to making mIRC suitable to his own personal needs and preferences...


mIRC Scripting: So easy a caveman could do it.
Re: Spell Check [Re: PhireCoder] #214290 28/07/09 01:12 AM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 393
T
The_JD Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
T
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 393
I have to agree with PhireCoder here, I hardly am the OP in Bug Reports/Feature Suggestions anymore because of argv0.
Admittedly, I do read daily, and I do post replies sometimes.

Perhaps we need a mediation board :p


[02:16] * Titanic has quit IRC (Excess Flood)
Re: Spell Check [Re: PhireCoder] #214291 28/07/09 01:16 AM
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,530
W
Wims Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
W
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,530
I think you're wrong...
Past give us an idea of Khaled's mind and what sort of thing he will probably add or not, then argv0 is just realistic when he said this or this will probably not be added, he might be wrong, but I'm sure most of the time he is not.
Like Horstl said, he have his way to tell thing and it might be difficult to read/get his post/point but how could you say he "has been discouraging certain feature" ? People ask for something with arguments or not, he is free to reply by saying what he think about the suggestion, it's not his only post that will make a difference.


Looking for a good help channel about mIRC? Check #mircscripting @ irc.swiftirc.net
Re: Spell Check [Re: Wims] #214292 28/07/09 01:28 AM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 72
P
PhireCoder Offline
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
P
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 72
It's not the particular post about any given feature suggestion which I am saying hinders mIRC development... It is the fact that he runs people off (Discourages them from posting anything else) who initially might not have had the best idea... but could potentially have helped out alot in the further development of mIRC... unfortunately now because of his harsh and rude criticism we will never know what awesomeness mIRC would/could have been.

Edit: mIRC is still awesome I'm only saying that some people could have came up with some revolutionary ideas that we will never know of now.

Last edited by PhireCoder; 28/07/09 01:31 AM.

mIRC Scripting: So easy a caveman could do it.
Re: Spell Check [Re: PhireCoder] #214293 28/07/09 01:41 AM
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,530
W
Wims Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
W
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,530
The point is that I'm sure it's not his intention to runs people off etc, people who think it is are probably not understanding his point because of the way he explain it

Last edited by Wims; 28/07/09 01:48 AM.

Looking for a good help channel about mIRC? Check #mircscripting @ irc.swiftirc.net
Re: Spell Check [Re: PhireCoder] #214294 28/07/09 02:08 AM
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,559
H
Horstl Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
H
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,559
(I assume this thread won't be back to topic soon, thus...)

You don't have to give reasons for why you like or dislike someone. But you don't have to like someone to respect him. And you shouldn't deny someone the befitting respect witout a very good reason... In other words: You don't have to share his opinion, and you don't have to like his person (or - as you don't know his person as a matter of fact - his style).
But you have to respect his person, his opinion, his mIRC/MSL knowledge and also the time devoted. Especially if you demand more respect from his side (e.g. regarding opposing opinions about a suggestion) it's not very consistent if you don't show the least yourself (as in parts of the posts above).

I don't deny the possibility that some of argv0s posts had had discouraging effects on others (though not "the community" as a whole). Yet he's not giving invalid arguments or the like. As stated, there's a lot of reasoning in his posts. Regarding the conclusions based on arguments for/against a feature suggestion: they're opinions - as valid as yours or mine, as Wims already pointed out.
I think the main issue is how some argument/opinion is communicated ("That's of no use because... This won't be added." vs. "I think the majority of users won't benefit from this suggestion because... I thus doubt it will be added").
Of course you can wish that this or that reply would be less "harsh". For my part, I do. But to me it's off the mark to say it "makes him completeley useless to these boards". And I think it wrongs him a lot to hold "the only thing he seems to be dedicated to is to making mIRC suitable to his own personal needs and preferences".

Last edited by Horstl; 28/07/09 02:11 AM.
Re: Spell Check [Re: Horstl] #214297 28/07/09 05:33 AM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
A
argv0 Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
A
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
I'm actually enjoying this discussion a lot. I'm quite flattered that people think I wield that much influence over feature suggestions and bug reports. Thank you.


- argv[0] on EFnet #mIRC
- "Life is a pointer to an integer without a cast"
Re: Spell Check [Re: argv0] #214316 28/07/09 04:53 PM
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3
O
OriginalTux Offline
Self-satisified door
Offline
Self-satisified door
O
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3
grin

Keep doing what you do mate. cool

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4