Fix grammatical error in AddUserToContext doc comment - #53
Merged
Conversation
The godoc comment read "to get add an authenticated user"; the leftover `get` is removed so it reads "to add an authenticated user".
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What was found
The godoc comment on
AddUserToContextinhttp/auth.gocontained a grammatical error -- a leftover word:"to get add" is not valid -- the word
getis an editing artifact.What was fixed
Removed the leftover
getso the comment reads "to add an authenticated user to the request context". This matches what the function does (and its name): it puts an authenticated user into the request context. One word removed; nothing else touched. Build andgo vetpass.Review notes
Clean review -- no concerns raised. Two competing reviewers confirmed the fix is correct, minimal, and that "add" (not "get") is the right correction. Both noted pre-existing stylistic nits in the same line (e.g. "is [Middleware] to add" could read "returns a [Middleware] that adds", and "request context" appears twice) but these predate this change and were intentionally left out of scope to keep the fix minimal.