Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixed typo in example.md #83

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

HenryAtBraveTurtles
Copy link

No description provided.

Copy link

@Awokein Awokein left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense to just use a placeholder. No reason for an actual phone number in example documentation.

@HenryAtBraveTurtles
Copy link
Author

HenryAtBraveTurtles commented Sep 24, 2023

Makes sense to just use a placeholder. No reason for an actual phone number in example documentation.

Thanks for the approval. This isn't just about not using the actual number, I guess I wasn't very clear on the typo part.

I've requested this to match the value with the "Expected Output" in your documentation, hope this helps.

--[[
	Expected output to the developer console:

	Action dispatched: {
	    phoneNumber = "12345678" (string)
	    type = "ReceivedNewPhoneNumber" (string)
	}
	State changed to: {
	    myPhoneNumber = "12345678" (string)
	    myFriends = {
	    }
	}
	Action dispatched: {
	    newFriends = {
	        1 = "Cassandra" (string)
	        2 = "Joe" (string)
	    }
	    type = "MadeNewFriends" (string)
	}
	State changed to: {
	    myPhoneNumber = "12345678" (string)
	    myFriends = {
	        1 = "Cassandra" (string)
	        2 = "Joe" (string)
	    }
	}
]]

@Awokein
Copy link

Awokein commented Sep 24, 2023

Thanks for the approval. This isn't just about not using the actual number, I guess I wasn't very clear on the typo part.

I've requested this to match the value with the "Expected Output" in your documentation, hope this helps.

Certainly does help. Thanks for the clarification. Either way it made sense, but with the additional information provided by yourself it further enhances why this PR should be accepted. Good spot & nice work 😊👍

@ZoteTheMighty
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for the contribution; please accept the SLA and I'd be glad to merge it

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 10, 2024

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.

@HenryAtBraveTurtles
Copy link
Author

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants