Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Missing MS Word feature

Missing MS Word feature

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
helplearningarchitecture
4 Posts 3 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • N Offline
    N Offline
    Nathan Addy
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Or maybe there's a workaround for this, I don't know... I've been working on a chapter for a book lately, which talks about the software architecture of a particular program. As you can imagine, I talk about specific software classes quite a bit, and of course, those class names aren't in the dictionary. So I'm swimming in a sea of red underlines, which obviously I don't love looking at. But I don't want to add those words to the dictionary: I would hate to think that a year from now, when all this is long forgotten, I'll misspell a word and see DiscreteProcessStepper as a suggestion. "Ignore" sort of hacks in the behavior I want; it'll prevent the word from being underlined, but neither will it recognize "DiscretePr0cessStepper" as probably being a mistaken attempt at the other. The problem is that while I am writing that document "DiscreteProcessStepper" is as real a word at any other, but as soon as I move on, it's "word-ness" evaporates and I don't want to mess with it anymore. What would be tres cool would be a way to add a word to the dictionary just for the current document. I'd be tough to do without actually attaching that information to the word document itself, and i doubt complicating document structure with all kinds of semantic information about that doc is going to help anyone. Nevertheless, more intelligent spell checking, that suggests technical words, but only where appropriate would be kind of cool.

    M D 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • N Nathan Addy

      Or maybe there's a workaround for this, I don't know... I've been working on a chapter for a book lately, which talks about the software architecture of a particular program. As you can imagine, I talk about specific software classes quite a bit, and of course, those class names aren't in the dictionary. So I'm swimming in a sea of red underlines, which obviously I don't love looking at. But I don't want to add those words to the dictionary: I would hate to think that a year from now, when all this is long forgotten, I'll misspell a word and see DiscreteProcessStepper as a suggestion. "Ignore" sort of hacks in the behavior I want; it'll prevent the word from being underlined, but neither will it recognize "DiscretePr0cessStepper" as probably being a mistaken attempt at the other. The problem is that while I am writing that document "DiscreteProcessStepper" is as real a word at any other, but as soon as I move on, it's "word-ness" evaporates and I don't want to mess with it anymore. What would be tres cool would be a way to add a word to the dictionary just for the current document. I'd be tough to do without actually attaching that information to the word document itself, and i doubt complicating document structure with all kinds of semantic information about that doc is going to help anyone. Nevertheless, more intelligent spell checking, that suggests technical words, but only where appropriate would be kind of cool.

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Marcus J Smith
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Tools -> Options -> Spelling & Grammer -> Custom Dictionaries :-D


      CleaKO

      "I think you'll be okay here, they have a thin candy shell. 'Surprised you didn't know that.'" - Tommy (Tommy Boy)
      "Fill it up again! Fill it up again! Once it hits your lips, it's so good!" - Frank the Tank (Old School)

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • N Nathan Addy

        Or maybe there's a workaround for this, I don't know... I've been working on a chapter for a book lately, which talks about the software architecture of a particular program. As you can imagine, I talk about specific software classes quite a bit, and of course, those class names aren't in the dictionary. So I'm swimming in a sea of red underlines, which obviously I don't love looking at. But I don't want to add those words to the dictionary: I would hate to think that a year from now, when all this is long forgotten, I'll misspell a word and see DiscreteProcessStepper as a suggestion. "Ignore" sort of hacks in the behavior I want; it'll prevent the word from being underlined, but neither will it recognize "DiscretePr0cessStepper" as probably being a mistaken attempt at the other. The problem is that while I am writing that document "DiscreteProcessStepper" is as real a word at any other, but as soon as I move on, it's "word-ness" evaporates and I don't want to mess with it anymore. What would be tres cool would be a way to add a word to the dictionary just for the current document. I'd be tough to do without actually attaching that information to the word document itself, and i doubt complicating document structure with all kinds of semantic information about that doc is going to help anyone. Nevertheless, more intelligent spell checking, that suggests technical words, but only where appropriate would be kind of cool.

        D Offline
        D Offline
        DavidNohejl
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Couldn't it be done with custom dictionary? (if there is such a thing of course)


        "Throughout human history, we have been dependent on machines to survive. Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony. " - Morpheus "Real men use mspaint for writing code and notepad for designing graphics." - Anna-Jayne Metcalfe

        N 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • D DavidNohejl

          Couldn't it be done with custom dictionary? (if there is such a thing of course)


          "Throughout human history, we have been dependent on machines to survive. Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony. " - Morpheus "Real men use mspaint for writing code and notepad for designing graphics." - Anna-Jayne Metcalfe

          N Offline
          N Offline
          Nathan Addy
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Looking at it, I guess it can be done that way. It's not that easy though. In preferences, you can globally select a dictionary. So I could make a copy of the dictionary, use that, and then switch back after I'm done. So that is totally possible, it's just a lot of work, and seems feels pretty "hacky" to me still.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          Reply
          • Reply as topic
          Log in to reply
          • Oldest to Newest
          • Newest to Oldest
          • Most Votes


          • Login

          • Don't have an account? Register

          • Login or register to search.
          • First post
            Last post
          0
          • Categories
          • Recent
          • Tags
          • Popular
          • World
          • Users
          • Groups