Handle other result types than near-misses #2

New Issue

yves-biener · 2023-10-11T21:43:23+02:00

yves-biener commented

2023-10-11 21:43:23 +02:00

Example: Running sp phyologie will cause an segmentation fault.

The issues is the disregard of the correct parsing of the result as ispell returns the following:

@(#) International Ispell Version 3.4.02 08 Jan 2021
# phyologie 0

The # is not an option which is currently handled at all and may cause the segmentation fault. This also includes ? which is also not handled at all.

should also be reported back to the user, i.e. by exiting with non-zero? # signals that there was no near miss and that the word is not known in the dictionary.

? signals a guess made by ispell which should be handled accordingly as well, as the output format differs from normal near-misses which use #.

Example: Running `sp phyologie` will cause an segmentation fault. The issues is the disregard of the correct parsing of the result as ispell returns the following: ``` @(#) International Ispell Version 3.4.02 08 Jan 2021 # phyologie 0 ``` The # is not an option which is currently handled at all and may cause the segmentation fault. This also includes ? which is also not handled at all. # should also be reported back to the user, i.e. by exiting with non-zero? # signals that there was no near miss and that the word is not known in the dictionary. ? signals a guess made by ispell which should be handled accordingly as well, as the output format differs from normal near-misses which use #.

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Reference: yves-biener/sp#2