Upgrade spellcheckers

[neiljp]

What does this PR do, and why?

Other than keeping codespell and typos up to date with any extra spelling suggestions, the new version of typos allows configuration in pyproject.toml. Previous typos-specific workarounds were possible if adding a dedicated typos.toml, which I thought we'd previously added but avoided, which was the original motivation for looking at the latest typos version.

The pyproject.toml configuration is actually required for the upgrade due to O_WRONLY now appearing as a false positive. However, this also allows checking of the FAQ by typos, which was previously excluded from both tools due to the presence of iterm, by extending the allowed words list.

Ideally this would be simpler if tools added inline ignores (crate-ci/typos#316, codespell-project/codespell#1212), particularly if the format was common to multiple tools.

External discussion & connections

• Discussed in #zulip-terminal in topic
• Fully fixes #
• Partially fixes issue #
• Builds upon previous unmerged work in PR #
• Is a follow-up to work in PR #
• Requires merge of PR #
• Merge will enable work on #

How did you test this?

• Manually - Behavioral changes
• Manually - Visual changes
• Adapting existing automated tests
• Adding automated tests for new behavior (or missing tests)
• Existing automated tests should already cover this (only a refactor of tested code)

Self-review checklist for each commit

• It is a minimal coherent idea
• It has a commit summary following the documented style (title & body)
• It has a commit summary describing the motivation and reasoning for the change
• It individually passes linting and tests
• It contains test additions for any new behavior
• It flows clearly from a previous branch commit, and/or prepares for the next commit

[epage]

Ideally this would be simpler if tools added inline ignores (crate-ci/typos#316, codespell-project/codespell#1212), particularly if the format was common to multiple tools.

Would love to have a common format for this. In the mean time, I believe both tools have support for regex ignores and you can create your own directives with that.

[neiljp]

@epage I was thinking of the regexes originally as primarily only for individual word cases.

However, I just saw codespell-project/codespell#1212 (comment), and I'm experimenting with relaxing the file exclusion using something like the following to maintain some potential compatibility with cspell (or if adopted more generally):

  ....  # spellchecker:disable-line

That seems to work with codespell using a form of the regex in that comment, but using this in pyproject.toml doesn't appear to work for typos:

[tool.typos.default]
extend-ignore-re = [".*# spellchecker:disable-line$"]

Should those two forms be comparable? Is this related to a nuance with regexes? (in rust? in typos?)

[epage]

To use anchors like that, you need to enable multi-line mode; try extend-ignore-re = ["(?m)^.*# spellchecker:disable-line$"]. I tested this in crate-ci/typos#835