> On a related note, I was using AbiWord to write a real paper for the first
> time today. I have always hated red squiggles, but I was actually
> impressed with the productivity that they added for me. However, I hate
> seeing red squiggles under names or words not in the dictionary. So I
> decided that the ideal implementation for me would display squiggles and
> let me middle-click on a word to flag it as "ignore". It sounds like
> making the squiggles ignore ignored words will be done soon. I'd be
> willing to implement a middle-click or modifier_key-click on a word (for
> Win32 and BeOS?) to ignore it if someone who understands the mouse
> handling of the text area could tell me where to start and if/when AbiWord
> has a mechanism for making the squiggle code ignore words it doesn't know
> on the command from the user.
>
> On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Justin Bradford wrote:
>
> > > You may want to confer with Justin before making your choice. Specifically,
> > > I'm not sure how he wants to turn off a single squiggle when you press the
> > > Ignore button in the dialog.
> >
> > I haven't dug through the squiggle code quite enough to know it's current
> > implementation, but I think a flag on the specific squiggle might work in
> > combination with a dirty-word squiggle updater. So, you ignore a specific
> > word, and it's corresponding squiggle's flag, bIgnore, gets set. When the
> > squiggle's are drawn, obviously this one is not. Likewise, when evaluating
> > the current context, this word is considered squiggleless. Then, when this
> > region is dirtied due to editing, it reevaluates whether the squiggle, and
> > clears this flag (if it's still misspelled, obviously). This would have
> > the effect of adding a space to an ignored word, then removing said space,
> > and the "new" word, while the same as the original, would now be
> > considered misspelled, and thus squiggled-- which is exactly how Word
> > works.
> >
> > Additionally, if I modified the dialog-based spell checking algorithm to
> > iterate through squiggles, rather than the whole document again, it gives
> > two additional benefits: 1) we don't have to look-up words again, they're
> > already marked, 2) if a squiggled word has bIgnore set, I'll just skip
> > over it, so that ignored words don't show up every time you spell check
> > (which is how Word workds).
> >
> > This implies always squiggling text in the background (but just not
> > always showing the squiggles).
> >
> > > Hmm. You mean they slow down editing to do the check, and then don't show
> > > the results except via that icon? (Sounds like strategy #2 above.)
> >
> > Yeah, with squiggles always around we could do things like status bar
> > icons/messages.
> >
> > > PS: This reminds me that we need to finish that old rewrite of the
> > > autospell code so that it just checks dirty words in response to editing,
> > > instead of doing the full destructive block-level recheck for each atomic
> > > edit.
> >
> > This is sort of key to everything I've suggested above. Also, while the
> > squiggle code is being updated, it might be worthwhile trying to figure
> > out how to not squiggle new words before they're finished being typed.
> >
> > Justin
> >
> >
> >
I dont think middle click would be a good idea as that is paste in X. Im not sure
(correct me if i am wrong) but i believe that they just implemented the X windows
cut and paste system.