Skip to content

docs: fix wording in Sorbet example comment #265

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
Rohan5commit wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+1 −1
Open

docs: fix wording in Sorbet example comment #265

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion examples/demo_sorbet.rb
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
# if you have sorbet LSP enabled, and uncomment the two lines below
# you will see a red squiggly line on `params` due to a quirk of the sorbet type system.
#
# this file will still infact, run correctly as uncommented.
# this file will still in fact, run correctly as uncommented.
Copy link

Copilot AI Apr 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The punctuation here reads awkwardly/incorrectly: "still in fact, run". Consider either removing the comma ("still in fact run") or moving it to the standard parenthetical form ("still, in fact, run"), and "when uncommented" reads clearer than "as uncommented".

Suggested change
# this file will still in fact, run correctly as uncommented.
# this file will still, in fact, run correctly when uncommented.

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.

# completion = client.chat.completions.create(params)
# pp(completion.choices.first&.message&.content)
Expand Down
Loading