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

[spell check] markdown parsing ignores last character before closing bracket #585

Closed
bmcminn opened this issue Dec 1, 2014 · 8 comments
Closed

Comments

@bmcminn
Copy link

bmcminn commented Dec 1, 2014

Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
ST3: 3065
Language: Markdown


Spell check incorrectly assumes the last character of a word preceding a closing bracket ] is not part of a word.

## Before spell check
- [testing something](stesindsklds)

In the context menu, Spell check correctly suggests "something" as the proper spelling and injects this correction in-place:

## After spell check
- [testing somethingg](stesindsklds)

Seems as though the spell check parser for Markdown misfires on punctuation delimiters.

image

sublime-text_issues_example-context-menu

@titoBouzout
Copy link
Collaborator

Confirmed, why this happens only with markdown...

@FichteFoll
Copy link
Collaborator

Also noticed this a long why ago but didn't really bother to create an issue. Pretty annoying in the occasions when I'd actually want to use spellcheck.

@sgerace
Copy link

sgerace commented Feb 5, 2015

Note that this also affects backticks (i.e., `) when used to denote inline code blocks, as in:

Here is `some` code

In this case, "some" will be marked as misspelled because it only sees "som".

@FichteFoll FichteFoll added this to the Build 3070 milestone Feb 18, 2015
@qgates
Copy link

qgates commented Jul 17, 2015

Reopening due to regression introduced in build 3090. Further info in this forum post.

@qgates qgates reopened this Jul 17, 2015
@qgates qgates removed the R: fixed label Jul 17, 2015
@titoBouzout
Copy link
Collaborator

may regression tag could be a good idea /cc @FichteFoll @qgates

@FichteFoll
Copy link
Collaborator

Sounds like a good idea to me; this seems to be happening more often lately.

I would suggest opening a new issue for previously-fixed issues however (not issues that haven't been fixed properly, like #239). I would also classify "regression" as a type probably, which is a sub-type of "bug". All regressions are bugs, since they used to work differently. Okay?

@qgates qgates closed this as completed Jul 17, 2015
@qgates qgates reopened this Jul 17, 2015
@qgates
Copy link

qgates commented Jul 17, 2015

Concur; it's a no-brainer. Apart from anything else, it's particularly useful for Jon to prioritise fixes to builds that broke previously working functionality.

@FichteFoll
Copy link
Collaborator

The regression is now tracked in #937, since this issue has been taken care of.

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

No branches or pull requests

5 participants