Fix typo in bless documentation

Changes the meaning, but should be correct according to the context.

Author: MasterDuke17

doc/Type/Mu.pod6

@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ way of initializing a class, even more so if the default constructor is
 disabled, since it can make it harder to correctly initialize the class from a
 subclass. For instance, in the above example, the C<new> implementation takes
 two positional arguments that must be passed from the subclass to the superclass
-in the exact order. That is not a real problem if it's not documented, but take
+in the exact order. That is not a real problem if it's documented, but take
 into account C<bless>, through C<BUILDALL>, will eventually be calling C<BUILD>
 in the class that is being instantiated. This might result in some unwanted
 problems, like having to create a C<BUILD> submethod to serve it correctly: