Well I certainly don't.
I may expect to come across it pretty often, but in an A minor piece, for example, you are likely to find just as many G naturals as G sharps, depending on the melodic and harmonic shape of the piece.

What I mean, Currawong, is that it behaves minorish and the F# is expected in A minor in a way that an A# is not expected. By the same token, I expect C major to have an F, but it will often modulate to the dominant and I'll have an F#, but my general expectation or feel for the piece will be "F". What I meant is the F# in A minor tends to be there for me as a probability as I play because generally it's part of that key, and we develop a feeling for majors and minors. Never mind, it's not important. I think I was looking at how we actually interact with music, key signatures, accidentals beyond theory.

You mean G# I assume. But yes, I follow your drift .

G#, yes, or F sharp double-sharp, ###. I've been translating "innovative technology" all day and I'm still at it. My mind is full of helixes, electromagnetic fields - not my cup of tea ...which maybe I should brew around now. Glad if I made some sense.

Thanks to Late Beginner for raising my original Pears bid of an accidental "The sign which alters a note by a semitone" with Groves
"A sign placed (in modern practice) before a note to alter its previously understood pitch by one or two semitones" ... and for moderator
Kreisler to have endorsed the Groves version.

Does this mean that we can refer to sharps and flats as accidentals?
Please don’t answer that!!!