Sorry that I was maybe not clear enough. I try to clarify below. Joost.
On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 13:08 +0100, Pascal Georges wrote: > > > 2009/2/19 Joost ´t Hart <joost.t.h...@planet.nl> > > The duration of the correction phase depends on the number of > corrections only (which is easily understood by the user as he > has given > them 'a go' himself) and is as far as I have noticed > reasonably mild. > Besides, it shows a progress bar. > > When using the command > File -> Maintenance -> Name spelling -> Spellcheck players names > Scid's UI is frozen for a while, and I see no progress bar. Yes, this is what I identified as "the hour glass" and tried to improve on in my second [Q], which you do not quote. > > Which is normal given that function sc_name_spellcheck in file > tkscid.cpp does not call any update to a progress bar. > True true true, but I was, for the time being, simply trying to stay away from the current (or wanted) implementation. An attempt to separate the What from the How. And discuss the What. > > > > The time taken for the investigation (only!) depends on the > number of > player names in the dBase and the size of the ssp file. > Reason: The > investigation is not stopped at 'MaxCorrections'. > > For me it is : after MaxCorrections is reached, most code is not > executed. What do you mean by "it is"? I assume you mean what you would prefer. Currently all code is executed (especially the dBase crawl), except that the replacement rule is withheld from the correction editor. > > It continues after > that without side effects with the only goal to present the > total number > corrections to make "of which the first MaxCorrections are > listed > below." > > So it is either > a) a configurable quicker scan, without knowing what is at > stake beyond, > or > b) a full scan, taking some time > > The in-between solution with some (fixed) number of > corrections as we > currently have it is the worst of both worlds. The > investigation takes > the same time, but you have to do it multiple (and sometimes > even many) > times. > > My patch follows approach (b). > > There is something to say for (a) as well. > > [Q] Do you a (all) agree that having a configurable limitation > implies > approach (b) for "infinite" and (a) for the other options? > That is, in > the latter case the user is NOT informed on the > status/progress of the > spell checking for the current base-as-a-whole. > > I don't see what prevents status update (at least a progress bar). > As I wrote, why not simply use a configurable threshold, the latest > value for MaxCorrections being "infinite" ? The thing is that with "infinite" you cannot make any assumption on how many corrections you will find. So you progress to....or virtually make no progress at all. You know however where you are in the name list in the database... With limited corrections on the other hand you cannot draw any conclusion from the position in the name list, so use a correction counter indeed. There is one extra thing that jumped to my mind: With multiple reduced correction passes, consecutive passes will take more and more time (since we will have straightened things up starting from the beginning of the name list), unless we somehow remember where we bailed out last time. Seems a bit error-prone to try to do so, so I guess this is another side effect the user will have to live with. > > [...] > > > [Q] Dunno if you got the chance to notice this, but the Chess > Assistant > guys follow the approach to explicitly add a player's country > (FIDE > style) to the name in a pair of ()'s. In the game list this > country part > is stripped off. > > This is not in PGN standard, so should be avoided. Ok, see what you mean, although nothing stops scid from doing anything internally. Funny though that CA does export the (country) parts into its PGN output and that scid is happy to import them (compliance versus interoperability - wanna be a better catholic than the pope :-) ). > > [...] > > But as I said I am not an user of spell checking features in Scid. So > certainly others would do a better job at discussing specifications. > Guys, this is an invitation! > Pascal > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA > -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise > -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation > -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD > http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H > _______________________________________________ Scid-users mailing list > Scid-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scid-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H _______________________________________________ Scid-users mailing list Scid-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scid-users
