Skip to content

Conversation

Julian
Copy link
Contributor

@Julian Julian commented Jul 22, 2025

Right now when running e.g. wait4x exec true, the output shows "Checking the true", which is awkward grammatically.

"Checking true" would be slightly better, or even better would be some message which is specific to the kind of condition being waited on ("Checking execution of true") but the latter seems more invasive of a change, so perhaps just dropping "the" is acceptable?

Right now when running e.g. `wait4x exec true`, the output shows "Checking the true", which is awkward grammatically.

"Checking true" would be slightly better, or even better would be some message which is specific to the kind of condition being waited on ("Checking execution of true") but the latter seems more invasive of a change, so perhaps just dropping "the" is acceptable?
@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 16477492417

Details

  • 1 of 1 (100.0%) changed or added relevant line in 1 file are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at 55.867%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 16475916256: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 1357
Relevant Lines: 2429

💛 - Coveralls

@atkrad
Copy link
Member

atkrad commented Jul 23, 2025

@Julian Thank you for your contribution!

@atkrad atkrad merged commit b04c154 into wait4x:main Jul 23, 2025
4 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants