Incorrect report of ambiguous unicode characters #10343

GiteaMirror commented

@sergeych commented on GitHub (Feb 25, 2023):

looks like it is fixed to not yet included in the try.gitea version (1.20...). Hope it is fixed ;)

@sergeych commented on GitHub (Feb 25, 2023): looks like it is fixed to not yet included in the try.gitea version (1.20...). Hope it is fixed ;)

GiteaMirror commented

@lunny commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2023):

I think this is a known issue.

@lunny commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2023): I think this is a known issue.

GiteaMirror commented

@wxiaoguang commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2023):

Known issues have been fixed. This could be a new issue.

If you could provide a reproducible page on try.gitea.io, maybe it would help some maintainers to take a look at it.

@wxiaoguang commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2023): Known issues have been fixed. This could be a new issue. If you could provide a reproducible page on try.gitea.io, maybe it would help some maintainers to take a look at it.

GiteaMirror commented

@wxiaoguang commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2023):

More or less related to this one, but not the same one:

@wxiaoguang commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2023): More or less related to this one, but not the same one: * https://try.gitea.io/DarrenPIngram/test/src/branch/main/test * https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/20451 ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2114189/222962470-162f2b16-e7b1-4a77-b090-29744654a0f5.png)

GiteaMirror commented

@sergeych commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2023):

Known issues have been fixed. This could be a new issue.

If you could provide a reproducible page on try.gitea.io, maybe it would help some maintainers to take a look at it.

I was not able to reproduce it on try.gitea - but the version there is a beta, while I'm using the latest stable. Hope it is fixed in beta (but strange it is not yet fixed in fresh new stable), but it is very likely its just a new "feature" not yet ported to the try.gitea. I sincerely hate the idea of trying to analyze unicode in the text field... Let browser do it. Practically no reason to spend effort to just make the life of gitea user just more complicated.

@sergeych commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2023): > Known issues have been fixed. This could be a new issue. > > If you could provide a reproducible page on try.gitea.io, maybe it would help some maintainers to take a look at it. I was not able to reproduce it on try.gitea - but the version there is a beta, while I'm using the latest stable. Hope it is fixed in beta (but strange it is not yet fixed in fresh new stable), but it is very likely its just a new "feature" not yet ported to the try.gitea. I sincerely hate the idea of trying to analyze unicode in the text field... Let browser do it. Practically no reason to spend effort to just make the life of gitea user just more complicated.

GiteaMirror commented

@wxiaoguang commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2023):

I was not able to reproduce it on try.gitea

Could you share the text contents of your screenshot? Wrap them here by ```

while I'm using the latest stable

Do you mean 1.18.x? If there is a chance, could you try 1.19.0-rc1? Most changes in try.gita.io are also in 1.19, but not in 1.18.

@wxiaoguang commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2023): > I was not able to reproduce it on try.gitea Could you share the text contents of your screenshot? Wrap them here by ```` ``` ```` > while I'm using the latest stable Do you mean 1.18.x? If there is a chance, could you try 1.19.0-rc1? Most changes in try.gita.io are also in 1.19, but not in 1.18.

GiteaMirror commented

@ARNik commented on GitHub (Mar 22, 2023):

Have the same issue with 1.19.0

@ARNik commented on GitHub (Mar 22, 2023): Have the same issue with 1.19.0

GiteaMirror commented

@sergeych commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2023):

So any plan to fix it? Just remove the clumsy and useless check.

@sergeych commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2023): So any plan to fix it? Just remove the clumsy and useless check.

GiteaMirror commented

@wxiaoguang commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2023):

Could you share the text contents of your screenshot? Wrap them here by ```

How about introducing a global config option to disable the check for all repositories?

@wxiaoguang commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2023): Could you share the text contents of your screenshot? Wrap them here by ```` ``` ```` ---- How about introducing a global config option to disable the check for all repositories?

GiteaMirror commented

@lunny commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2023):

I like to add a global option to disable it but keep it open default as before.

@lunny commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2023): I like to add a global option to disable it but keep it open default as before.

GiteaMirror commented

@sergeych commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2023):

with due respect what is the reason to leave it on by default if it just
does not works false reporting absolutely normal sequences?

On Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 4:13 AM Lunny Xiao @.***> wrote:

I like to add a global option to disable it but keep it open default as
before.

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/23149#issuecomment-1492812414,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACJIIITP53YHHTBTHRSFADW66MNDANCNFSM6AAAAAAVH4EK3E
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
@.***>

@sergeych commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2023): with due respect what is the reason to leave it on by default if it just does not works false reporting absolutely normal sequences? On Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 4:13 AM Lunny Xiao ***@***.***> wrote: > I like to add a global option to disable it but keep it open default as > before. > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/23149#issuecomment-1492812414>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACJIIITP53YHHTBTHRSFADW66MNDANCNFSM6AAAAAAVH4EK3E> > . > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: > ***@***.***> >

GiteaMirror commented