Skip to content

fix typo #301

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
Merged
mikepitre merged 2 commits into from
Dec 9, 2025
Merged

fix typo #301

mikepitre merged 2 commits into from
Dec 9, 2025

Conversation

@clerknikki
Copy link
Contributor

@clerknikki clerknikki commented Dec 9, 2025 •
edited by coderabbitai bot
Loading

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes

    • Corrected spelling in the resend-code prompt shown on sign-in, sign-up, and profile verification screens ("Didn't receive a code?").

  • Style

    • Slight spacing adjustment in the resend prompt for improved visual spacing.

  • Localization

    • Updated the localization key for the resend-code prompt so the corrected phrase is used across locales.

✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 9, 2025 •
edited
Loading

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes fix a typo and adjust spacing in UI text across multiple files: the phrase "Didn't recieved a code? " was corrected to "Didn't receive a code?" in SignInFactorCodeView, SignUpCodeView, and UserProfileVerifyView, and HStack spacing was changed from 0 to 2 in those views. The localization key in Localizable.xcstrings was updated to match the corrected phrase (trailing space removed).

Pre-merge checks

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Title check ❓ Inconclusive The title 'fix typo' is vague and generic, failing to specify which typo or which component is being fixed. Use a more descriptive title such as 'Fix typo: recieve → receive in code verification prompts' to clearly identify the specific change.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Disabled knowledge base sources:

  • Linear integration is disabled by default for public repositories

You can enable these sources in your CodeRabbit configuration.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4e2c841 and ef128ae.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • Sources/Clerk/ClerkUI/Components/Auth/SignIn/SignInFactorCodeView.swift (1 hunks)
  • Sources/Clerk/ClerkUI/Components/Auth/SignUp/SignUpCodeView.swift (1 hunks)
  • Sources/Clerk/ClerkUI/Components/UserProfile/UserProfileVerifyView.swift (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • Sources/Clerk/ClerkUI/Components/UserProfile/UserProfileVerifyView.swift
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
**/*

⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file

If there are no tests added or modified as part of the PR, please suggest that tests be added to cover the changes.

**/*: Only comment on issues that would block merging, ignore minor or stylistic concerns.
Restrict feedback to errors, security risks, or functionality-breaking problems.
Do not post comments on code style, formatting, or non-critical improvements.
Keep reviews short: flag only issues that make the PR unsafe to merge.
Group similar issues into a single comment instead of posting multiple notes.
Skip repetition: if a pattern repeats, mention it once at a summary level only.
Do not add general suggestions, focus strictly on merge-blocking concerns.
If there are no critical problems, respond with minimal approval (e.g., 'Looks good'). Do not add additional review.
Avoid line-by-line commentary unless it highlights a critical bug or security hole.
Highlight only issues that could cause runtime errors, data loss, or severe maintainability issues.
Ignore minor optimization opportunities, focus solely on correctness and safety.
Provide a top-level summary of critical blockers rather than detailed per-line notes.
Comment only when the issue must be resolved before merge, otherwise remain silent.
When in doubt, err on the side of fewer comments, brevity and blocking issues only.
Avoid posting any refactoring issues.

Files:

  • Sources/Clerk/ClerkUI/Components/Auth/SignIn/SignInFactorCodeView.swift
  • Sources/Clerk/ClerkUI/Components/Auth/SignUp/SignUpCodeView.swift
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (8)
  • GitHub Check: Build on all platforms (macCatalyst)
  • GitHub Check: Build on all platforms (tvOS)
  • GitHub Check: Build on all platforms (macOS)
  • GitHub Check: Build on all platforms (watchOS)
  • GitHub Check: Build on all platforms (visionOS)
  • GitHub Check: Run tests on macOS
  • GitHub Check: semgrep-cloud-platform/scan
  • GitHub Check: semgrep-cloud-platform/scan

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@mikepitre mikepitre merged commit 766d28a into main Dec 9, 2025
9 checks passed
@mikepitre mikepitre deleted the fix-code-verification-page-copy branch December 9, 2025 14:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@mikepitre mikepitre mikepitre approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@clerknikki @mikepitre