Package: imp4
Version: 4.0.2-2
Severity: minor
The README.Debian contains the following snippet:
The differences between ispell and aspell are subtle but important.
The author of ispell writes:
[Aspell's] primary advantage is that it is better at making
suggestions when a word is seriously misspelled. For example,
when given "trubble", ispell will suggest only "rubble", where
aspell suggests "trouble" (as its first choice) as well as
"dribble", "rubble", and a lot of other words. Its disadvantage
is that the approximate-matching algorithm is specific to English.
That "disadvantage" is false (it may have been the case many years ago,
but not now). See for example
http://aspell.net/man-html/Phonetic-Code.html#Phonetic-Code. In fact,
aspell is superior to ispell is almost every aspect.
Quoting the Aspell author:
The only major area where Ispell is superior to Aspell is in the
handling of multi character letters such as old ASCII encoding of
accented characters. However, Aspell can handle UTF-8 documents far
better than Ispell can.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.12.4
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
