Skip to content
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

Jump to bottom

fix: IsHash decorator doc comment is wrong #535

Closed
nmeyering opened this issue Feb 26, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

fix: IsHash decorator doc comment is wrong #535

nmeyering opened this issue Feb 26, 2020 · 2 comments
Labels
status: done/released Issue has been completed, no further action is needed. type: fix Issues describing a broken feature.

Comments

@nmeyering
Copy link

It's nice that the IsHash decorator was added in #445 but the documentation is wrong.

The doc comment seems to be copied from the phone number decorator. Would be nice if it could explain e.g. possible values for the algorithm parameter. (could even have its own type?)
@vlapo
Copy link
Contributor

vlapo commented May 5, 2020

Already fixed.

@vlapo vlapo closed this as completed May 5, 2020
@lock
Copy link

lock bot commented May 20, 2020

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 20, 2020
@NoNameProvided NoNameProvided added status: done/released Issue has been completed, no further action is needed. type: fix Issues describing a broken feature. labels Aug 8, 2020
@NoNameProvided NoNameProvided changed the title IsHash decorator doc comment is wrong fix: IsHash decorator doc comment is wrong Aug 8, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
status: done/released Issue has been completed, no further action is needed. type: fix Issues describing a broken feature.
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@nmeyering @vlapo @NoNameProvided