# Expecting New Version of Xbench with improvements

**URL:** <https://forum.xbench.net/t/expecting-new-version-of-xbench-with-improvements/785>\
**Category:** Technical Support\
**Created:** [May 16, 2021, 1:01pm UTC](https://forum.xbench.net/t/expecting-new-version-of-xbench-with-improvements/785 "2021-05-16T13:01:55Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![HunterYang](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f05b48/32.png) [@HunterYang](https://forum.xbench.net/u/HunterYang)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2021, 1:01pm UTC](https://forum.xbench.net/t/expecting-new-version-of-xbench-with-improvements/785/1 "2021-05-16T13:01:55Z")

</div>

Hi everyone,

I hope Xbench can be improved based on the following items:

1. “Ignore Tags” option can’t be reflected in checklist, even if I was using it for searching and added my search expression to checklist. So a lot of false-positive errors are reported in my checklist checking.

2. I need more space in lower pane of checking results, but I can’t hidden the upper pane (containing options) or drag the divider line up.

3. How should I check if the underline formatting in source text is missing in translation?

4. Can you provide the regular expression of every build-in QA option? So I can customize them to reduce false-positive errors.

I’m licensed user of 1520 and you can always reach me at [hyang@acclaro.com](mailto:hyang@acclaro.com).

Thank you very much and I’m expecting a more powerful new version of Xbench!

Kind regards,

Hunter

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jeff\_Chapman](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/forum.xbench.net/jeff_chapman/32/261_2.png) [@Jeff\_Chapman](https://forum.xbench.net/u/Jeff_Chapman)\
**Post date:** [January 13, 2022, 4:36am UTC](https://forum.xbench.net/t/expecting-new-version-of-xbench-with-improvements/785/2 "2022-01-13T04:36:01Z")

</div>

Great ideas. I especially like #4, the one about providing access to the regex for every built-in QA option.

I assume that Xbench itself uses regex “behind the scenes” in its code for the built-in QA options. It would be an excellent idea to allow the user to customize those as well, just as @HunterYang mentioned, to reduce false positives and further improve customization. Also, we could duplicate and modify those built-in QA expressions to create exactly the kind of checks we need. Currently, we have to disable them if they get in the way, and build our own.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pcondal](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/forum.xbench.net/pcondal/32/305_2.png) [@pcondal](https://forum.xbench.net/u/pcondal)\
**Post date:** [January 14, 2022, 1:30am UTC](https://forum.xbench.net/t/expecting-new-version-of-xbench-with-improvements/785/3 "2022-01-14T01:30:55Z")

</div>

Xbench QA canned checks do not use Regex for performance and functionality reasons.

Xbench code is closed source, but if you have development skills you can build a custom QA plugin to replicate the functionality of the check.

There are QA plugin samples in Delphi and C/C++ in [Github](https://github.com/xbench) and the manual for writing QA plugins is [here](https://docs.xbench.net/programmer-reference-qa-plugins/).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jeff\_Chapman](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/forum.xbench.net/jeff_chapman/32/261_2.png) [@Jeff\_Chapman](https://forum.xbench.net/u/Jeff_Chapman)\
**Post date:** [January 14, 2022, 1:56am UTC](https://forum.xbench.net/t/expecting-new-version-of-xbench-with-improvements/785/4 "2022-01-14T01:56:45Z")

</div>

Interesting information. Thanks. This was a bit of an older thread, but @HunterYang never got a reply here, so it seemed appropriate to bring it up. Hope he/she is still watching the thread and can get some useful tips from your reply as well.

I am impressed at how fast Xbench runs the QA checks. Practically instant, at least for the documents I do that contain only around 10,000–20,000 characters at the most.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![scavicchio](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/forum.xbench.net/scavicchio/32/482_2.png) [@scavicchio](https://forum.xbench.net/u/scavicchio)\
**Post date:** [January 14, 2022, 3:02pm UTC](https://forum.xbench.net/t/expecting-new-version-of-xbench-with-improvements/785/5 "2022-01-14T15:02:54Z")

</div>

Hi,

I don’t recall if I saw this post before.  
The item #2 from HunterYang [to hide the upper pane (containing options) or to drag the divider line up] is very helpful. Could it be implemented asap?

Thank you!  
Sílvia