No, you can't use a grep interactively to find unbalanced characters (not reliably anyway), you'd need a script for that. And it's not trivial by any means, especially the quotes (apostrophes make trouble). But there's bound to be a script around to check unbalenced characters. Have you googled around?
I was checking scripts used by coders to detect these anomalies; but this tip of a key word like «unbalanced characters» will help.
I am using something brutal like
that partially resolves the problem, not really a problem, just a few isolated cases and the manual checking is affordable, although this grep finds the next occurrence. For proofreading sound a good idea to use these tools.
If you had a GREP style for open parenthesis to be one colour, and closed parenthesis to be another colour.
Same with quotation marks.
It would make it easier to spot.
Yes, and also ID f/change windows shows the culprits. The problem is that the grep sometimes jumps to the next paragraph and should be adjusted:
[but the unbalanced characters point is pending with grep: now I don't know very well what I am talking about, that seems similar to the recursion postulates by mr Turing)
Yes, Eugene, colour:
mi mamá (me ama) ) no todo el tiempo aunque a veces sí (no suele hacerlo) y no siempre es lo mejor para mí)
Faced with this problem, I had approached it as follows:
But that only gives us an overview of the problems ...
Using the same way and Multi-Find/Change, we can quickly colorize the "(" and ")" in different colors...
yes, your regex catches text inside pairing parentheses.
This one do that with parenthesis.
What a nice example!
Yes, something interesting is that nested parentheses are also controlled.
I was trying to extend this regex to double and single quotations to extend a minimum set of tools to improve the proofreading process. I think is a valuable idea.
Using the regex below has a large interest in the context of a replay. By applying:
in the paragraph style (grep associated with a color), this allows a first easy reading. Text can be corrected.
When it is achieved, simply run the following regex
And, automatically, the following reading can begin...
At the end of the replay, just replace # by ( and @ by ).
Yes. If the first grep is changed to just a simple colour the lecture is perfectly achieved. And later, trashing the colour all be the desired corrected statu quo.
I am beginning to think in quotes and brackets...
Thanks for this.