[chromium-dev] Re: About hunspell
I was thinking about using it in mobile environment. Your patch is very useful there too. And mobiles do not have slow HDD, so maybe reading it from file with proper caching can be fast enough. Dmitry On 7 июл, 13:23, Brett Wilson bre...@chromium.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Dmitry.Skibadmitry.sk...@gmail.com wrote: Ah yes, it's other way around. Strange that I didn't think about it :) By the way, what do you think about implementing NodeReader that reads data from file, not memory? Why would you want to do that? We memory map the file so we don't have to read it in all at once. Brett --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[chromium-dev] Re: About hunspell
Ah yes, it's other way around. Strange that I didn't think about it :) By the way, what do you think about implementing NodeReader that reads data from file, not memory? I understand that it will slow things down, but maybe there are some caching strategies that can help? At first glance it seems that simply buffering next X Kb can help. Dmitry On 4 июл, 12:07, Brett Wilson bre...@chromium.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Dmitry.Skibadmitry.sk...@gmail.com wrote: Recently I was playing with hunspell and got very displeased with its code (which claims to be cpp, but in fact 'classified' c). I even started to think about rewriting it in, you know, correct cpp. Then I realized that Chrome also uses hunspell and went to the repository. I saw a very useful patch to HashMgr, which in fact alters its behaviour pretty much. And at the same time all old code were left as is. Glad you like it! So I have a question: why? Why didn't you just remove all that old and unused code? It's unlikely that your patches will be merged into hunspell. We do this so we can tell what we changed so it's easier to merge to future versions of Hunspell. Of course it should be possible to do with SVN logs only, but it makes it a little easier. I believe there are some new capabilities we would like to take advantage of in the newer ones. Brett --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[chromium-dev] Re: About hunspell
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Dmitry.Skibadmitry.sk...@gmail.com wrote: Recently I was playing with hunspell and got very displeased with its code (which claims to be cpp, but in fact 'classified' c). I even started to think about rewriting it in, you know, correct cpp. Then I realized that Chrome also uses hunspell and went to the repository. I saw a very useful patch to HashMgr, which in fact alters its behaviour pretty much. And at the same time all old code were left as is. Glad you like it! So I have a question: why? Why didn't you just remove all that old and unused code? It's unlikely that your patches will be merged into hunspell. We do this so we can tell what we changed so it's easier to merge to future versions of Hunspell. Of course it should be possible to do with SVN logs only, but it makes it a little easier. I believe there are some new capabilities we would like to take advantage of in the newer ones. Brett --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
