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.

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

Typo in isReplaceOperation function comment: 'REPACE' should be 'REPLACE #852

Open
arrowloki opened this issue Mar 9, 2025 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #853
Open

Typo in isReplaceOperation function comment: 'REPACE' should be 'REPLACE #852

arrowloki opened this issue Mar 9, 2025 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #853
Assignees

Comments

@arrowloki
Copy link

Describe the bug
There is a typo in the JSDoc comment for the isReplaceOperation function. The comment incorrectly refers to "REPACE" instead of "REPLACE".

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. View the source code file containing the isReplaceOperation function
  2. Look at the JSDoc comment which currently reads:
/**
 * isReplaceOperation check if the operation is an REPACE
 * @param operation the name of the SCIM Patch operation
 * @return true if this is a replace operation
 */

Expected behavior
The comment should read "REPLACE" instead of "REPACE" to match the actual operation name..

Screenshots
N/A

Desktop (please complete the following information):

  • OS: [e.g. iOS]
  • Browser [e.g. chrome, safari]
  • Version [e.g. 22]

Smartphone (please complete the following information):

  • Device: [e.g. iPhone6]
  • OS: [e.g. iOS8.1]
  • Browser [e.g. stock browser, safari]
  • Version [e.g. 22]

Additional context
This is a simple documentation typo and does not affect functionality. I'd be happy to submit a PR to fix this issue.

@arrowloki
Copy link
Author

This will be my first open source contribution. Please consider this.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants