Greasy Fork

Got a few examples and questions on how to filter.

heeya CF_Y, thanks for evolving & advancing the original filtering concepts, which go back to https://greasyfork.org/scripts/12179.

Speaking of, I want to replace using that predecessor with GF++ (actually, I'm using https://greasyfork.org/scripts/13514 - same thing).

I read thru the feedback here so hope I'm not repeating what others have already asked.

Using Tampermonkey v5.3.3 / GF++ 3.3.5 / Firefox 128.8.0ESR

Where are 'Non-Latin' and 'Blacklist' stored?
I looked thru the code (admittedly I'm not a developer) but I don't find the contents or a link to them. When I first learned of GF+ or GF++, I thought I saw each list is stored offline. Is this (still) the case?

While on https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts?per_page=100&locale_override=1&sort=updated, filtering isn't triggering:

How-to filter? - Terms with a '.' eg "Krunker.io"
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/538607
BTW, looking at code, 'Blacklist' should already filter it, yes/no?
I already tried re/Krunker.IO/i and it broke the script, lol

'Non-Latin' enabled - Hey, how did you slip thru!
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/539516
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/539490
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/539471

Mixed charsets:
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/539470
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/539531

Those that slip-thru maybe because a NON-alphanumeric symbol (funny: how to would we filter "Greasy Fork++")
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/539514
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/539499

Using Tampermonkey v5.3.3 / GF++ 3.3.5 / Firefox 128.8.0ESR

ohh, should note that I'm also using [TS] Citrus GFork, so it may be conflicting with GF+(+).

ohh, should note that I'm also using [TS] Citrus GFork, so it may be conflicting with GF+(+).

Update: yup, here's one conflict - with Citrus disabled, "Krunker.io" is hidden via GF++; thus I'm assuming 'Blacklist' is working overall.

However the other exceptions I noted above still appear in the search results, e.g. the 'Non-Latin' results

FYI-- not using any custom filtering terms.

I will review the filtering based on 12179 or 13514.

Where are 'Non-Latin' and 'Blacklist' stored?

const nonLatins = /[^\p{Script=Latin}\p{Script=Common}\p{Script=Inherited}]/gu;

    const blacklist = [
        '\\bagar((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bagma((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\baimbot\\b', '\\barras((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bbot(s)?\\b',
        '\\bbubble((\\.)?am)?\\b', '\\bcheat(s)?\\b', '\\bdiep((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bfreebitco((\\.)?in)?\\b', '\\bgota((\\.)?io)?\\b',
        '\\bhack(s)?\\b', '\\bkrunker((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\blostworld((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bmoomoo((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\broblox(\\.com)?\\b',
        '\\bshell\\sshockers\\b', '\\bshellshock((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bshellshockers\\b', '\\bskribbl((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bslither((\\.)?io)?\\b',
        '\\bsurviv((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\btaming((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bvenge((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bvertix((\\.)?io)?\\b', '\\bzombs((\\.)?io)?\\b',
        // '\\p{Extended_Pictographic}'
    ];

These are default blacklists, bought from GF+.

each list is stored offline. Is this (still) the case?

Yes. This is just a simple script.

Update: yup, here's one conflict - with Citrus disabled, "Krunker.io" is hidden via GF++; thus I'm assuming 'Blacklist' is working overall.

I think it might be hard to have no conflict with it. You might ask Citrus to add the feature you want and switch to it.

This script is just very simple to add some minor features. I want these tiny features so I made alternations to GF+

I don't really use 'Non-Latin' and 'Blacklist' but if there are better filtering list I can update when I have time.

updated blacklist filter by referring https://greasyfork.org/scripts/12179 and https://greasyfork.org/scripts/13514

This script is just very simple to add some minor features. I want these tiny features so I made alternations to GF+

Cool, got it.

Where are 'Non-Latin' and 'Blacklist' stored?

const nonLatins = /[^\p{Script=Latin}\p{Script=Common}\p{Script=Inherited}]/gu;

These are default blacklists, bought from GF+.

each list is stored offline. Is this (still) the case?

Yes. This is just a simple script.

I don't understand that code so pardon my simplistic question:-- Do we need to have GF+/GFBF/etc also installed (and enabled) for GF++ to use its blocklist?

no need. just updated the blocklist filter in this script