housekeeping: tidy up cref documentation in event builder (#1753) #1753
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
Member
|
@olevett Are there any other comments that where added that could potentially cause problems? |
glennawatson
previously approved these changes
Oct 10, 2018
Member
Author
|
@RLittlesII not that I've found, I don't think these are anything major, just saw the build warning and though I could fix it :) |
RLittlesII
changed the title
RLittlesII
force-pushed
the
eventbuilder-warnings
branch
from
f2ca592 to
6f37531
Compare
glennawatson
approved these changes
Oct 10, 2018
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
really minor docs update
What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
T:blah used in crefs, analyser doesn't like it
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
Analyser should like it
What might this PR break?
Nothing?
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
Other information: