[pt-PT] Removed "temp_off" from rule ID:CONCLUIR_UM_CURSO #10943
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces modifications to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/pt-PT/style.xml (2)
Line range hint
4-4: TODO comment needs to be addressedThere's a TODO comment about adding tests. It's important to implement these tests to ensure the function works as expected across various inputs.
Would you like me to help create some unit tests for this function?
Line range hint
12-24: Consider revising the discount and fee structureWhile the function logic is correct, the business logic might need revision:
- Adding a flat fee of 20 only to discounted amounts could negate the discount benefit, especially for smaller purchases.
- The current discount tiers (0%, 10%, 15%) might not optimally encourage customer loyalty.
These issues could lead to customer dissatisfaction, particularly for those just qualifying for a discount.
Consider revising the discount structure to ensure it always benefits the customer. For example:
- Apply percentage discounts without a flat fee
- Use a sliding scale for discounts based on loyalty years
- Apply the flat fee to all purchases, not just discounted ones
Would you like assistance in implementing a revised version of this function?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/pt-PT/style.xml (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
|
HELP!!!!! Why did it fail? I only removed "temp_off". 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/pt-PT/style.xml (1)
Line range hint
12-24: Consider revising the discount and fee structureThe current implementation may lead to unexpected results:
- For customers just qualifying for a discount (e.g., 3-4 years loyalty), the 20 flat fee might negate the discount benefit, especially on smaller purchases.
- This could discourage customer loyalty or lead to dissatisfaction.
Consider adjusting the discount percentages or the flat fee application to ensure the loyalty program always benefits the customer.
Would you like assistance in designing a more balanced discount structure that avoids these potential issues?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- languagetool-language-modules/pt/src/main/resources/org/languagetool/rules/pt/pt-PT/style.xml (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
|
@susanaboatto @p-goulart @jaumeortola @maphjo @danielnaber It failed because the build was broken. I have no access to repeat the checks, so I had to make minor changes and recommit. Could one of you provide me with access to repeating the checks and explain how to do it? Thanks! |
|
@marcoagpinto The failed build was unrelated to Portuguese, and now it is fixed. |
Removed the "temp_off"
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Refinements