Difference between revisions of "Lint"

From Apertium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 14: Line 14:
 
==Transfer==
 
==Transfer==
   
* when doing <code><clip></code>, check that the attribute listed in <code>part=""</code> is defined using a <code><def-attr></code>.
+
# Issue in : <pre> <code><clip></code> </pre> Problem : Check that the attribute listed in <code>part=""</code> is defined using a <code><def-attr></code>.
   
 
==Modes==
 
==Modes==

Revision as of 08:10, 1 May 2016

About

This page contains a log of all the different errors that the lint will be designed to handle. Along with it, as it's development progresses updates will be posted here about the different releases.

Along with this, documentation about the lint's working and technicalities will also be specified here.

Monodix

Bidix

Transfer

  1. Issue in :
     <code><clip></code> 
    Problem : Check that the attribute listed in part="" is defined using a <def-attr>.

Modes

Tagger

Others

Lexical selection
  • don't use lrx-proc without the -m option.


Consistency of {Multichar_Symbols/sdefs/LISTs/SETs}
  • This may be larger task chopped to dozens of checks, but IMO source of most problems:
  • bidix should not have sdefs that are not in monodix or lexc file. (Same can be carried over to lrx, rlx, t?x etc. fails)