Fix Typo in JakartaArbitraryValidator ValidationFailedException message#1217
Merged
seongahjo merged 1 commit intonaver:mainfrom Jul 11, 2025
Conversation
seongahjo
approved these changes
Jul 11, 2025
Contributor
seongahjo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Thank you for your contributing!
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
This PR modifies the
DefaultArbitrayValidator, a typo present in theValidationFailedExceptionmessage within theJakartaArbitraryValidatorclass, toDefaultArbitraryValidator.Related Issue: [#1216 ]
(Optional): Description
A typo in the string 'DefaultArbitrayValidators ConstructViolations. type: ..' used to generate 'ValidationFailedException' in the 'validate' method of the 'JakartaArbitraryValidator' file was found and corrected.
How Has This Been Tested?
It is a string typo correction within the code, and does not affect the way separate functional tests and existing logic work.
Is the Document updated?
N/A