Skip to content

Fix regex for 'viz' in Latinisms YAML #201

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
rajannpatel wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+1 −1
Open

Fix regex for 'viz' in Latinisms YAML #201

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion styles/Canonical/025a-latinisms-with-english-equivalents.yml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -29,4 +29,4 @@ swap:
\bstatus\squo\b: "'state' or 'state of things'"
\b(?:versus|vs\.(?!\w)|vs(?![\.\w])): "'compared to/with' or 'opposed to'"
\bvice\sversa\b: "'the reverse' or 'the other way around'"
\b(viz\.(?!\w)|viz(?![\w\.])): "'specifically' or 'namely'"
\b(?:viz\.(?!\w)|viz(?![\w\.])): "'specifically' or 'namely'"
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SecondSkoll SecondSkoll May 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
\b(?:viz\.(?!\w)|viz(?![\w\.])): "'specifically' or 'namely'"
\b(viz(?!\.?\w)): "'specifically' or 'namely'"

The suggested fix doesn't actually do anything (there's some weirdness to non-capturing groups in our Vale implementation), in fact it's the same logic as the existing code. It should work properly already, but as you have raised there are some uncaptured cases and some false positives for some reason.

It seems there's some real weirdness with escaped . characters, which is the root of the issue. It looks like the easiest way to deal with it is to drop the capture of the . that should exist after viz.

This requires a small change to the test cases as well.