Closed ghost closed 5 years ago
It seems like there original documentations included "only" in the three instances of this construction. It was changed in each case in this commit: https://github.com/mojolicious/mojo-pg/commit/cd07e1ea3074f08076a4ddacee041ad9e7ccf766
Hi Joel
Thanx for the follow-up. But that means there are yet more grammatical problems :-(.
On 15/1/19 4:58 am, Joel Berger wrote:
It seems like there original documentations included "only" in the three instances of this construction. It was changed in each case in this commit: cd07e1e https://github.com/mojolicious/mojo-pg/commit/cd07e1ea3074f08076a4ddacee041ad9e7ccf766
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/mojolicious/mojo-pg/issues/53#issuecomment-454100222, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/Ai1WBrv7BrbdsyG4qprtmJTk0aJYkXarks5vDMU9gaJpZM4Z9dbw.
-- Ron Savage - savage.net.au
Based on that commit, I think the easiest correction is to add a comma after 'So far,' in each case. The 'are supported' at the end of the sentence is important to understanding it currently, a comma would make it easier to read.
Steps to reproduce the behavior
In the docs for SQL::Abstract::Pg, under ON CONFLICT, the sentence 'So far undef to pass DO NOTHING, ...' is hard to understand due to the use of 'far'. Did you mean 'use'?
Expected behavior
EXPLAIN WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN HERE
Actual behavior
EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED INSTEAD HERE