Closed montanajava closed 1 year ago
Hi @montanajava Thank you very much for the effort you spent improving the docs. This the kind of the help I need.
Please try to add your pull request to the dev channel not the master so I can check and merge them.
Merging #279 (d898eed) into master (e2828f4) will decrease coverage by
0.00%
. The diff coverage isn/a
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #279 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 96.31% 96.30% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 66 66
Lines 4969 4957 -12
==========================================
- Hits 4786 4774 -12
Misses 183 183
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
...cr/state_management/reactive_model/snap_state.dart | 90.00% <0.00%> (-0.11%) |
:arrow_down: |
...njected/undo_redo_persist_state/persist_state.dart | 92.04% <0.00%> (-0.09%) |
:arrow_down: |
...do_redo_persist_state/undo_redo_persist_state.dart | 96.87% <0.00%> (-0.05%) |
:arrow_down: |
...te_management/legacy/state_with_mixin_builder.dart | 97.29% <0.00%> (-0.04%) |
:arrow_down: |
...ent_booster/injected_form_field/injected_form.dart | 98.79% <0.00%> (-0.02%) |
:arrow_down: |
...lib/scr/navigation/navigator2/router_delegate.dart | 96.50% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
...velopment_booster/injected_crud/injected_crud.dart | 100.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
..._management/reactive_model/reactive_model_imp.dart | 97.08% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
...nagement/reactive_model/injected/injected_imp.dart | 95.43% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
...booster/injected_animation/injected_animation.dart | 100.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
... and 2 more |
:mega: We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more
merged in dev channel
Hi, I would like to propose some improvements to the documentation to help readability and hopefully help new users of your library.
Also, in the code, I deleted some commented-out sections that I felt were unclear as to why the code was left there. Then there were some file name changes due to spelling errors.
The proposed changes apply only to the examples.
I am quite sure that they proposals are not perfect, so I would appreciate if you would review the changes on an individual basis. As you will see, they were extensive in the amount of files touched. That said, the changes proposed do not change the intent or the content of the documentation.
Hope that you find this an improvement. Thanks for your great work and contribution to the community.
Best, Steve G