Add check for reserved interpolation keys #629
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Introduce a new check to identify translations that use reserved interpolation keys (e.g., 'count', 'scope').
glebm
approved these changes
Apr 22, 2025
Collaborator
davidwessman
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please fix rubocop errors and normalize the new translations 🙂
You can ignore the ruby 2.6 tests
Contributor
Author
|
I haven’t used plain RuboCop in a while and mixed up the |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We recently ran into
I18n::ReservedInterpolationKeyerrors because we usedformatas an interpolation key. That made us wonder whyi18n-tasks, which we run in CI, didn’t catch it.Turns out this kind of check isn’t part of the gem – so I added one.
Would love your thoughts on whether this makes sense as a general feature or if we should just keep it as a project-specific check.