From 11ecc4d322c4c529ba40ff34eb8e35cc9e4da7fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Liam Gallagher Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 04:51:05 +1200 Subject: [PATCH] docs: Fix incorrect docs in the run conditions example (#14377) ## Objective Make the docs say the right thing. ## Solution Edit the docs so they say the right thing. Seems like overtime the example has changed but the comment did not change with it. It originally was a AND but is now an OR. --- examples/ecs/run_conditions.rs | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/examples/ecs/run_conditions.rs b/examples/ecs/run_conditions.rs index 42d828e81cbea..39cc0a37f7784 100644 --- a/examples/ecs/run_conditions.rs +++ b/examples/ecs/run_conditions.rs @@ -25,8 +25,7 @@ fn main() { .run_if(resource_exists::.or( // This is a custom run condition, defined using a system that returns // a `bool` and which has read-only `SystemParam`s. - // Both run conditions must return `true` in order for the system to run. - // Note that this second run condition will be evaluated even if the first returns `false`. + // Only a single run condition must return `true` in order for the system to run. has_user_input, )), print_input_counter