Restore boundary_property when iterator reaches EOF and matches no rule #3404
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In the testcase `one.`, when we reached `e` and `.`, we must look ahead one more character to determine if it matches WB6 [1]. However, `.` and EOF doesn't match any rule, and it makes `e` and `.` matching WB999 (a break) instead. We should restore `boundary_property` in this scenario. [1] https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr29/#WB6 [2] https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr29/#WB999
sffc
approved these changes
May 3, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks! Seems plausible but I'd like @makotokato to review.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixed #3392.
In the testcase
one., when we reachedeand., we must look ahead one more character to determine if it matches WB6 [1]. However,.and EOF doesn't match any rule, and it makeseand.matching WB999 [2] (a break) instead. We should restoreboundary_propertyin this scenario.[1] https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr29/#WB6
[2] https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr29/#WB999