Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | Am Samstag, 9. September 2006 11:50 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
| > | | > Why can't enchant be added without touching the existing
| > spellcheckers?
| > | | I suggested that some days ago, but Jean-Marc argued that it is
| > too much | work if the others are supposed to be removed.
| > But we don't know that yet.
|
| How much time do you think you need to take a decision? When you make
| up your mind in one or two years, just tell me and I'll do the change.
| The code in ControlSpellChecker is awful and really too complicated
| and I am not willing to work with that.
What is it in SpellBase that makes to hard for the controller to work
with?
Does the controlelr ever see anything else than a pointer/ref to some
spellbase?
If it is cleanup of this you want to change, go ahead... but it really
should have no relation to introducing a new type of spellchecker.
--
Lgb
