nateshmbhat

fixed mistakes in documentation

@@ -514,8 +514,8 @@ If you need to use your controller in many other places, and outside of GetBuild @@ -514,8 +514,8 @@ If you need to use your controller in many other places, and outside of GetBuild
514 class Controller extends GetxController { 514 class Controller extends GetxController {
515 515
516 /// You do not need that. I recommend using it just for ease of syntax. 516 /// You do not need that. I recommend using it just for ease of syntax.
517 - /// with static method: Controller.to.counter();  
518 - /// with no static method: Get.find<Controller>().counter(); 517 + /// with static method: Controller.to.increment();
  518 + /// with no static method: Get.find<Controller>().increment();
519 /// There is no difference in performance, nor any side effect of using either syntax. Only one does not need the type, and the other the IDE will autocomplete it. 519 /// There is no difference in performance, nor any side effect of using either syntax. Only one does not need the type, and the other the IDE will autocomplete it.
520 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // add this line 520 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // add this line
521 521
@@ -107,8 +107,8 @@ Si necesita usar su Controller en muchos otros lugares y fuera de GetBuilder, si @@ -107,8 +107,8 @@ Si necesita usar su Controller en muchos otros lugares y fuera de GetBuilder, si
107 class Controller extends GetXController { 107 class Controller extends GetXController {
108 108
109 /// You do not need that. I recommend using it just for ease of syntax. 109 /// You do not need that. I recommend using it just for ease of syntax.
110 - /// with static method: Controller.to.counter();  
111 - /// with no static method: Get.find<Controller>().counter(); 110 + /// with static method: Controller.to.increment();
  111 + /// with no static method: Get.find<Controller>().increment();
112 /// There is no difference in performance, nor any side effect of using either syntax. Only one does not need the type, and the other the IDE will autocomplete it. 112 /// There is no difference in performance, nor any side effect of using either syntax. Only one does not need the type, and the other the IDE will autocomplete it.
113 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // add this line 113 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // add this line
114 114
@@ -534,8 +534,8 @@ Jika anda perlu menggunakan controller anda di banyak tempat, dan diluar dari Ge @@ -534,8 +534,8 @@ Jika anda perlu menggunakan controller anda di banyak tempat, dan diluar dari Ge
534 class Controller extends GetxController { 534 class Controller extends GetxController {
535 535
536 /// Anda tidak membutuhkan itu. Saya menyarankan menggunakannya hanya untuk kemudahan sintaks. 536 /// Anda tidak membutuhkan itu. Saya menyarankan menggunakannya hanya untuk kemudahan sintaks.
537 - /// dengan static method: Controller.to.counter();  
538 - /// tanpa static method: Get.find<Controller>().counter(); 537 + /// dengan static method: Controller.to.increment();
  538 + /// tanpa static method: Get.find<Controller>().increment();
539 /// Tidak ada perbedaan dari segi performa, atau efek samping apapun dalam menggunakan kedua sintaks diatas. Yang berbeda hanyalah yang satu tidak memerlukan type, dan yang satu lagi akan di autocomplete oleh IDE. 539 /// Tidak ada perbedaan dari segi performa, atau efek samping apapun dalam menggunakan kedua sintaks diatas. Yang berbeda hanyalah yang satu tidak memerlukan type, dan yang satu lagi akan di autocomplete oleh IDE.
540 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // Tambahkan baris ini 540 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // Tambahkan baris ini
541 541
@@ -514,8 +514,8 @@ If you need to use your controller in many other places, and outside of GetBuild @@ -514,8 +514,8 @@ If you need to use your controller in many other places, and outside of GetBuild
514 class Controller extends GetxController { 514 class Controller extends GetxController {
515 515
516 /// You do not need that. I recommend using it just for ease of syntax. 516 /// You do not need that. I recommend using it just for ease of syntax.
517 - /// with static method: Controller.to.counter();  
518 - /// with no static method: Get.find<Controller>().counter(); 517 + /// with static method: Controller.to.increment();
  518 + /// with no static method: Get.find<Controller>().increment();
519 /// There is no difference in performance, nor any side effect of using either syntax. Only one does not need the type, and the other the IDE will autocomplete it. 519 /// There is no difference in performance, nor any side effect of using either syntax. Only one does not need the type, and the other the IDE will autocomplete it.
520 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // add this line 520 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // add this line
521 521
@@ -114,8 +114,8 @@ class Controller extends GetController { @@ -114,8 +114,8 @@ class Controller extends GetController {
114 114
115 /// Você não precisa disso. Eu recomendo usar isso apenas 115 /// Você não precisa disso. Eu recomendo usar isso apenas
116 /// porque a sintaxe é mais fácil. 116 /// porque a sintaxe é mais fácil.
117 - /// com o método estático: Controller.to.counter();  
118 - /// sem o método estático: Get.find<Controller>(); 117 + /// com o método estático: Controller.to.increment();
  118 + /// sem o método estático: Get.find<Controller>().increment();
119 /// Não há diferença em performance, nem efeito colateral por usar esse sintaxe. Só uma não precisa da tipage, e a outra forma a IDE vai autocompletar. 119 /// Não há diferença em performance, nem efeito colateral por usar esse sintaxe. Só uma não precisa da tipage, e a outra forma a IDE vai autocompletar.
120 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // adicione esta linha 120 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // adicione esta linha
121 121
@@ -507,8 +507,8 @@ class OtherClass extends StatelessWidget { @@ -507,8 +507,8 @@ class OtherClass extends StatelessWidget {
507 class Controller extends GetxController { 507 class Controller extends GetxController {
508 508
509 /// You do not need that. I recommend using it just for ease of syntax. 509 /// You do not need that. I recommend using it just for ease of syntax.
510 - /// with static method: Controller.to.counter();  
511 - /// with no static method: Get.find<Controller>().counter(); 510 + /// with static method: Controller.to.increment();
  511 + /// with no static method: Get.find<Controller>().increment();
512 /// There is no difference in performance, nor any side effect of using either syntax. Only one does not need the type, and the other the IDE will autocomplete it. 512 /// There is no difference in performance, nor any side effect of using either syntax. Only one does not need the type, and the other the IDE will autocomplete it.
513 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // add this line 513 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // add this line
514 514
@@ -507,8 +507,8 @@ class OtherClass extends StatelessWidget { @@ -507,8 +507,8 @@ class OtherClass extends StatelessWidget {
507 class Controller extends GetxController { 507 class Controller extends GetxController {
508 508
509 /// 你不需要这个,我推荐使用它只是为了方便语法。 509 /// 你不需要这个,我推荐使用它只是为了方便语法。
510 - /// 用静态方法:Controller.to.counter()。  
511 - /// 没有静态方法的情况下:Get.find<Controller>().counter(); 510 + /// 用静态方法:Controller.to.increment()。
  511 + /// 没有静态方法的情况下:Get.find<Controller>().increment();
512 /// 使用这两种语法在性能上没有区别,也没有任何副作用。一个不需要类型,另一个IDE会自动完成。 512 /// 使用这两种语法在性能上没有区别,也没有任何副作用。一个不需要类型,另一个IDE会自动完成。
513 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // 添加这一行 513 static Controller get to => Get.find(); // 添加这一行
514 514