I would like to extend existing rule with the antipattern and unification. The unification for verb tense is given here languagetool/grammar.xml at master · languagetool-org/languagetool · GitHub like:
<unification feature="tense">
<equivalence type="INF">
<token postag=".*:INF(:.*)*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</equivalence>
<equivalence type="IMP">
<token postag=".*:IMP(:.*)*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</equivalence>
<equivalence type="Fut">
<token postag=".*:Fut(:.*)*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</equivalence>
<equivalence type="Past">
<token postag=".*:Past(:.*)*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</equivalence>
<equivalence type="Real">
<token postag=".*:Real(:.*)*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</equivalence>
</unification>
I am working on rule <rule default="on" id="Verb_and_Verb" name="Глагол и глагол"> here languagetool/grammar.xml at master · languagetool-org/languagetool · GitHub
The problem is with the anipattern (commented at the moment here languagetool/grammar.xml at master · languagetool-org/languagetool · GitHub"
<antipattern>
<unify>
<feature id="tense"/>
<marker>
<token postag="VB:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
<token postag="VB:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</marker>
</unify>
</antipattern>
It looks to be quite valid, however, it leads to an error
Running pattern rule tests for Russian... Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Error analyzing sentence: '<S> Здесь[здесь/ADV,здесь/PRDC] будет[быть/VB:Fut:Sin:P3] строиться[строиться/VB:INF] всё[всё/ADV,весь/PADJ:Neut:Nom,весь/PADJ:Neut:V] больше[больше/ADV,больший/ADJ_Short:Neut,большой/ADJ_Sup] жилья[жильё/NN:Neut:Sin:R].[</S>]'
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.PatternRule.match(PatternRule.java:166)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.PatternRuleTest.match(PatternRuleTest.java:492)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.PatternRuleTest.testCorrectSentences(PatternRuleTest.java:470)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.PatternRuleTest.testGrammarRulesFromXML(PatternRuleTest.java:272)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.PatternRuleTest.runTestForLanguage(PatternRuleTest.java:198)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.PatternRuleTest.runGrammarRulesFromXmlTestIgnoringLanguages(PatternRuleTest.java:149)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.PatternRuleTest.main(PatternRuleTest.java:558)
Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.Unifier.isSatisfied(Unifier.java:130)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.Unifier.isUnified(Unifier.java:418)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.AbstractPatternRulePerformer.testUnificationAndGroups(AbstractPatternRulePerformer.java:154)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.AbstractPatternRulePerformer.testAllReadings(AbstractPatternRulePerformer.java:95)
at org.languagetool.tagging.disambiguation.rules.DisambiguationPatternRuleReplacer.replace(DisambiguationPatternRuleReplacer.java:94)
at org.languagetool.tagging.disambiguation.rules.DisambiguationPatternRule.replace(DisambiguationPatternRule.java:101)
at org.languagetool.rules.Rule.getSentenceWithImmunization(Rule.java:130)
at org.languagetool.rules.patterns.PatternRule.match(PatternRule.java:162)
... 6 more
if I replace this unified antipattern with a set of direcly composed antipatterns for each and every tense
<antipattern>
<marker>
<token postag="VB:IMP:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
<token postag="VB:IMP:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</marker>
</antipattern>
<antipattern>
<marker>
<token postag="VB:Fut:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
<token postag="VB:Fut:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</marker>
</antipattern>
<antipattern>
<marker>
<token postag="VB:Real:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
<token postag="VB:Real:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</marker>
</antipattern>
<antipattern>
<marker>
<token postag="VB:Past:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
<token postag="VB:Past:.*" postag_regexp="yes"/>
</marker>
</antipattern>
everything goes OK.
Any ideas what I am doing wrong?