Yeah lol. It’s not a very difficult fix really. Rather than checking if the string contains any invisible characters, it should check if it only contains invisible characters. The way they’re doing it now unintentionally breaks a lot of stuff (breaking stuff unintentionally is a pretty common thing with unicode lol).
Yeah lol. It’s not a very difficult fix really. Rather than checking if the string contains any invisible characters, it should check if it only contains invisible characters. The way they’re doing it now unintentionally breaks a lot of stuff (breaking stuff unintentionally is a pretty common thing with unicode lol).
Hey, at least I get to laugh at unicode: “combining grapheme joiner”, “the name of this character is misleading; it does not actually join graphemes”.
It’s honestly easier to just check if it starts with those.
It is, yeah, which is why I suggested that in the issue :)