✅ Deploy Preview for livecodes ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	b253888
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/livecodes/deploys/67477c00f20e3a0009a07b0d
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-641--livecodes.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

Thanks @zyf722

That is nice.

Is there an easy way to run the test locally? e.g. npm package. This can allow us to reproduce problems locally without having to keep pushing to GitHub to see results.
I know there is a vscode extension (which is convenient during authoring) but I'm not sure we can use it to run over the whole code base.

How about cspell? Also has a vscode extension which seems to be very popular. I'm actually using it.
(I know I slipped a few spelling mistakes, but I was not enforcing it with a test! 😅)

Is there an easy way to run the test locally? e.g. npm package. This can allow us to reproduce problems locally without having to keep pushing to GitHub to see results.

typos is written in Rust, and as far as I know, there is no official npm package for typos. Instead, you can either manually download pre-built binaries from the GitHub release or install it via cargo, brew, conda, or pacman.

You might also be interested in their pre-commit hook.

How about cspell? It also has a VSCode extension which seems to be very popular. I'm actually using it.

It's new to me. I will check it out and see if it fits our needs better :)

I was not enforcing it with a test! 😅

Indeed, actually I guess we might be faced with false positives in some cases.

Perhaps it would be better to only throw warning annotations when typos are detected, rather than error annotations and terminate the workflow?

Indeed, actually I guess we might be faced with false positives in some cases.

Actually, cspell does have some false positives in my experience with it.

Perhaps it would be better to only throw warning annotations when typos are detected, rather than error annotations and terminate the workflow?

I agree.

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud