-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 139
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement Damerau Levenshtein distance checking for parts and memories #1701
Comments
There are subtle but important differences between programmer, part and memory names:
I think it's OK to limit suggestions for a part if the programmer has unambiguously been specified and hence the supported programming interfaces are known. |
OK, this might be more difficult to solve than I first imagined. I'd think that we should only suggest the full name (atmega328p, not m328p), and ignore subtypes (ATmega328P-AU). So if the user uses
I think we should always suggest the full memory name to prevent confusion.
I think case-insensitive matches for memories would be the best. A user may write Off topic: |
As in PR #1703? |
Good idea. |
@MCUdude I won't be attempting to extend Damerau-Levenshtein to parts, mainly because I think that's waaay too complex a task with too little benefit. The asymmetry between parts and programmers as outlined above is just too big... |
#1593 related
Right before the v7.3 release, we added DL distance checking to programmers, so that Avrdude would suggest a programmer in case of a typo, rather than printing the entire list:
Neat! Now this would be just as neat to have for memories and parts as well:
One thing that's great about the DL implementation for the programmers is that it won't suggest a programmer that's not compatible with the part:
But what should we print if:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: