Improved unclear comments in the code and fix documentations on exit() function in action.js #174
Conversation
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
…consistency with the rest of the code
… rest of the code
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
name: Pull request template
about: GenderMag Recorders Assistant project
What does this implementation fix? Explain your changes.
This implementation improves clarity and accuracy of an existing comment related to personaName. It also adds consistent, detailed documentation to the exit() function to match the style and format used for other functions in the project. These changes enhance the readability and maintainability of the codebase.
Does this close any open issue? (Give issue id from issue tracker)
Yes, this is working on the current open issue #89
Include any related logs, error, output file etc.
No logs, errors, or output files were produced or affected.
Did you test on Mac and Windows?
No functional code changes were made, so cross-platform testing was not necessary.
Did you test the full GM process and verify that the code does not contribute any unexpected errors/bugs?
Yes, the tool was tested to confirm these documentation changes did not affect functionality or introduce any errors.
Did you follow the style guidelines and verify that the code does not have any incorrect formatting?
Yes, the comments and documentation follow the project's style guidelines and are consistent with existing code documentation.
If possible, provide a screenshot of the functionality.
N/A, no UI or functionality changes were made.
Any other information?
These documentation improvements will assist current and future contributors in understanding the code better, supporting ongoing maintenance and enhancements.