Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!srhqla!quad1!ttidca!kevin
From: kevin@ttidca.TTI.COM (Kevin Carothers)
Newsgroups: comp.editors
Subject: Re: spelling from within vi
Message-ID: <21197@ttidca.TTI.COM>
Date: 14 Nov 90 18:37:24 GMT
References: <1990Oct31.153710.7865@cec1.wustl.edu> <1990Nov7.005405.461@investor.pgh.pa.us> <59025@microsoft.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Citicorp/TTI, Santa Monica
Lines: 33

In article <1990Nov7.005405.461@investor.pgh.pa.us> rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bob Peirce #305) writes:
>I usually use :1,.$!spell.  This replaces the buffer with your spelling
>errors, but u[ndo] restores the buffer.

 A VERY dangerous proposition indeed.

And in article <59025@microsoft.UUCP> steveha@microsoft.UUCP (Steve Hastings) writes:
>Simpler still:
>
>:w !spell
>
>This pipes the whole file through spell, then waits for you to hit a key
>before showing you the file again.  No danger of losing your data, and less
>to type.
>
 [---]


 Which is sound advice.
 However, if People are more "comfortable" with Mr. Pierce's more 
 orthogonal approach, the buffer "replace" behavior may be obviated
 by the following syntax;

 :1,.$w !spell


 This command may also be entered with buffer marks;

 :'a,'bw !spell


--
Kevin Carothers   {csun,psivax,philabs,retix}!ttidca!kevin