Skip to content
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

Check spelling 0.0.24 #3051

Open
wants to merge 29 commits into
base: devel
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Check spelling 0.0.24 #3051

wants to merge 29 commits into from

Conversation

jsoref
Copy link
Contributor

@jsoref jsoref commented Nov 26, 2024

Related Issue(s)
Has Unit Tests (y/n)
Documentation Included (y/n)

Change Description

  • Upgrades check-spelling to v0.0.24 (GitHub will start triggering various annoying warnings for older versions at some point in the near future)
  • Remove dead rtems5 link (the link checker was complaining)
  • a handful of spelling fixes based on newer heuristics in spell-check-this
  • harmonize the Checklist markdown tables (some of which had incorrect links)
  • a bunch of accessibility fixes based on:

Do not use (click) here links

For more information, see:

(?i)(?:>|\[)(?:(?:click |)here|link|(?:read |)more)(?:</|\]\()

Rationale

Testing/Review Recommendations

Testing was performed inhttps://github.com/check-spelling-sandbox/fprime/actions/

Future Work

I might actually ship a v0.0.25 in the near future (but quite likely not before the deprecations trigger).

Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
for many aspects of F´ are available

Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <[email protected]>
@@ -5,6 +5,9 @@
},
{
"pattern": "https?://"
},
{
"pattern": "^\\.\\./tree/HEAD/"
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This relates to some magic in the advice file which relies on GitHub rendering the markdown in a very specific context where the link is valid)...

Comment on lines +12 to +13
`^` refers to the file's path from the root of the repository, so `^README\.md$` would exclude [README.md](
../tree/HEAD/README.md) (on whichever branch you're using).
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This works when rendered by check-spelling in GitHub, but it upsets the link checker (see previous comment)

Comment on lines -149 to +151
\[[^\]]+\]\(https://github\.com/[^/\s"]+/?\)
#\[[^\]]+\]\(https://github\.com/[^/\s"]+/?\)
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jsoref jsoref Nov 26, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I commented this one out because it wasn't terribly useful, the items it found were generally correctly spelled phrases as opposed to people and as such it was more likely to mask a bug than quiet noise about people/accounts.

Comment on lines 49 to +50
atype
atypes
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This pair is here because of a difference of opinions between the old workflow and the new workflow. In the new workflow atype can be removed.

@@ -281,12 +294,11 @@ errornum
ert
esb
ethanchee
eturn
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This was probably from a pattern that I've improved

Comment on lines -97 to +101
Document | Link
-------- | ----
Design Checklist | [Link](Checklist_Design.xlsx)
Code Checklist | [Link](Checklist_Code.xlsx)
Unit Test Checklist | [Link](Checklist_Unit_Test.xls)
Checklist |
-------- |
[Design](Checklist_Design.xlsx) |
[Code](Checklist_Code.xlsx) |
[Unit Test](Checklist_Unit_Test.xls) |
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are a couple of variations on these checklists. I don't think the two column format helps anyone, it certainly hurts anyone using a screen reader (and it also hides bugs ...).

Comment on lines -70 to +74
Document | Link
-------- | ----
Design Checklist | [Link](Checklist_Design.xlsx)
Code Checklist | [Link](Checklist_Design.xlsx)
Unit Test Checklist | [Link](Checklist_Unit_Test.xls)
Checklist |
-------- |
[Design](Checklist_Design.xlsx) |
[Code](Checklist_Code.xlsx) |
[Unit Test](Checklist_Unit_Test.xls) |
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is one of the tables where there was a bug in the links. The second row said Code but had a Link to Design.

* the following conditions are aheared to. The following conditions
* the following conditions are adhered to. The following conditions
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this license block is a bit of a mess since it's original to the license block. I have an experimental feature that lets me ignore blocks instead of lines, but I'm not particularly comfortable with the design.

As I just made a PR yesterday to a project which unfortunately had included wil in expect.txt, I'd encourage people use patterns.txt or excludes.txt if they really want to accept specific instances of typos, lest they accidentally enable typos to spread.

patterns.txt

# openssl license typo
the following conditions are adhered to

excludes.txt

^\QUtils/Hash/openssl/sha.h\E$

@@ -26,7 +26,6 @@ define types and headers needed for F´ for any embedded system they desire.
[Platform Template](../api/cmake/platform/platform-template.md): Platform file template documentation
[Linux](../api/cmake/platform/Linux.md): Linux platform support
[Darwin](../api/cmake/platform/Darwin.md): Darwin (macOS) platform support
[rtems5](../api/cmake/platform/rtems5.md): RTEMS 5 initial support
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As noted, the link checker didn't like this link. I did spend a bit of time trying to follow the history of its introduction/removal, but gave up.

Each type of code has it's own unique custom XML syntax. To date
Each type of code has its own unique custom XML syntax. To date
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

another new heuristic

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant