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

[pt] Added APs to rules ID:GENERAL_NUMBER_AGREEMENT_ERRORS and GENERAL_VERB_AGREEMENT_ERRORS #11184

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 11, 2025

Conversation

marcoagpinto
Copy link
Member

@marcoagpinto marcoagpinto commented Jan 11, 2025

Antipatterns to fix false positives.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Improvements
    • Enhanced Portuguese language grammar checking rules
    • Added two new antipattern rules to improve language detection and error checking
    • Refined token matching for specific grammatical scenarios in Portuguese language

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 11, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces two new antipattern elements in the Portuguese language grammar rules file. These antipatterns define specific token combinations and postag patterns to improve grammar checking accuracy. The first antipattern focuses on verb-related tokens, while the second targets a more complex combination of determiners, pronouns, and verb forms. These additions aim to enhance the precision of grammatical rule detection in Portuguese language processing.

Changes

File Change Summary
languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/grammar.xml Added two new <antipattern> elements with specific token postag combinations for Portuguese grammar rules

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • jaumeortola
  • p-goulart

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/grammar.xml (2)

9133-9141: LGTM! Antipattern effectively handles "X de nós" constructions.

The antipattern correctly prevents false positives in cases where plural determiners/pronouns followed by "de nós" take a third-person plural verb. The examples provided are grammatically correct and illustrative.

Consider adding an example with a different determiner to show the pattern's full scope, such as:

  • "Alguns de nós preferem estudar à noite."
  • "Vários de nós trabalham remotamente."

4386-4391: Well-structured placement of antipatterns.

The antipatterns are correctly positioned:

  1. The verb sequence antipattern is placed globally, benefiting all subrules
  2. The "X de nós" antipattern is specifically placed in GENERAL_VERB_AGREEMENT_ERRORS where it's most relevant

Also applies to: 9133-9141

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c32f97f and e800b2f.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/grammar.xml (2 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (java-kotlin)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/grammar.xml (1)

4386-4391: LGTM! Antipattern correctly handles complex verb constructions.

The antipattern effectively prevents false positives in sequences containing a verb followed by a gerund and a past participle. The example sentence "Parece-me teres bem compreendido..." demonstrates valid usage.

Let's verify if there are similar patterns in the codebase that might need this antipattern:

✅ Verification successful

Antipattern is unique and doesn't conflict with existing rules

The similar pattern found in style.xml serves a different purpose (style checking for specific phrases with 'estar') and won't conflict with our antipattern for verb+gerund+participle constructions. The antipattern is safe to implement.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for similar verb patterns in other rules
rg -l "postag='V.+'.+postag='RG'" "languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/"

Length of output: 188


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Get context around the verb+gerund patterns in style.xml
rg -B2 -A2 "postag='V.+'.+postag='RG'" "languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/style.xml"

Length of output: 420

@marcoagpinto marcoagpinto merged commit 01fb4a7 into master Jan 11, 2025
5 checks passed
@marcoagpinto marcoagpinto deleted the lt_marcoagpinto_20250111_1314 branch January 11, 2025 13:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant