Amen. As a dyslexic (which most often shows when I'm typing as you folks have experienced) autocorrect generally is a PITA. FWIW: Grammerly works well for me. It underlines in dotted red and lets me look at what it thinks it should be - where I can accept it or not. Doug -- I agree DWIM was just silly.... UCB's Pascal system (pix) tried it also and let's just say it failed as I explain in a comment /answer on quora ( https://www.quora.com/When-you-are-programming-and-commit-a-minor-error-such-as-forgetting-a-semicolon-the-compiler-throws-an-error-and-makes-you-fix-it-for-yourself-Why-doesn-t-it-just-fix-it-by-itself-and-notify-you-of-the-fix-instead ). Clem On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 10:33 PM Doug McIlroy wrote: > > What i like is the autocorrect feature in v8: > > > > $ cd /usr/blot > > /usr/blit > > $ pwd > > /usr/blit > > Here I am, editor of the v8 manual and unaware of the feature. > We now know that silent correction is a terrible idea. > > Postel's principle: "be conservative in what you do, be liberal > in what you accept from others" was doctrine in early HTML > specs, and led to disastrous disagreement among browsers' > interpretation of web pages. Sadly, the "principle" lives on > despite its having been expunged from the HTML spec. > > Today's "langsec" movement grew out of bitter experience > with malicious inputs exploiting "liberal" interpretation of > nonconforming data. > > Today's NYT has an article about fake knockoffs of George Orwell > for sale on Amazon. It cites an edition of "Animal Farm" > apparently pirated by lowgrade OCR autocorrected and never > proofread. One of the many gaffes is that every instance of > "iv" beame ChapterIV, as in "prChapterIVacy". > > I didn't like some Lisp systems' DWIM (do what I mean) when I > first heard about the feature, and I like it even less 40-some > years on. I would probably have remonstrated with Rob had I > realized the shell was doing it. > > Doug >