|
Hey, you know what we should do?...make a CSharpScript browser plugin to run it 'sorry, no spelling check unless you install the CSharpScript plugin' 
|
|
|
|
|
Trouble is there would have to be at least three of 'em: Chrome, Firefox and Opera.
Maybe an IE6 one for the companies that won't let people use a "proper" browser? 
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
We'll just do one for IE and open source it...the rest can add it if they want...IE's market share will go up and they will all get in line
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, CP could be moving towards Node.JS - that would be really good 
|
|
|
|
|
I always thought that's what the grammar pedants were here for. Now the OPs can get abuse direct from the website. 
Kidding aside, it sounds like a worthy cause, however, will the spelling and grammar correction improve the content or the amount of effort put into a posting or article? Your fuel efficiency may fluctuate under different usage conditions.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
...hope it includes an 'off' switch...some of my misspellings are kinda my way of expressing myself, ya know?
|
|
|
|
|
Definitely
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
<FlagellatingTheExpiredEquine>
The must be an off switch, and it must stay off. Spelling checkers are an abomination, and grammar checkers are worse. For every case where they find I've made an error, they come up with 100's of false positives to annoy me. While the grammar checker in Microsoft Word (for example) can be tailored, it takes too much work for far too little result. Bitch at me about dangling participles (bad habit1) and passive voice (bad habit2), and STFU.
I won't have an impudent piece of sh*t software telling me how to express myself.
</FlagellatingTheExpiredEquine>
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
You have time until next summer? But really - I would love to help with this, but time is a serious factor just now for me...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not after spell-ckecking - every decent browser already has that. I've after spell fixing. But really, not even spelling: just punctuation and stuff. Light touch to make a big difference.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
But clearly there is a lack of use by many.
At least if there appears to be errors flagged by the JS implementation, you could flag a message "Hey, dunderhead, it looks like you have issues to sort out, fix them before submitting!" 
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I'm not after spell-ckecking
Obviously
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, you get a 5 for that
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, you forgot the number one annoyance, "This is better then that." I assume it's when English is the third language...
|
|
|
|
|
Will there be a nuclear option for the words "codez" and "plz"?
|
|
|
|
|
That's actually a required part of the spec.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
'Add to Dictionary':
- codez
- plz
- Asp.net
- aSP.Net
- AsP.nEt
|
|
|
|
|
My voat iz fer a kontezt.
Cuz, the codez and kommentz that ppl right should b ur choice 2 regul8, what, az owner of the boardz around hear, though im not sure.
Plz consider thiz a YEZ voat, so i then did the rite thing.
However, my voat's mileage may vary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
See reply[^]
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's automatic speech correction that he's after, not spell checking. So, you'd want to correct text speech from things like ur to your.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, and of your phrase "yeah, that means you lot," it doesn't work.
"yeah, that means the lot of you" is more accurate.
Though, that may get confused with "yeah, that means allot of you," which implies not the whole "lot of us," of which my using 'the whole "lot"' might further confuse others to discern I mean "a whole lot" which, like "allot of you," doesn't mean the whole "lot of you" that "lot" is describing, which is the whole of us.
So, now you (the singular "you," you being the reader, of which, when there is more than a singular "you" reader, collectively, all you readers would also be the "lot of you" readers, though not the lot of you the original "lot of you" denotes) know.
modified 18-Aug-14 13:38pm.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
