doc: explain chunkstring inconsistency

[samber]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.18%. Comparing base (8211383) to head (6ee1841).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #789   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.18%   94.18%           
=======================================
  Files          18       18           
  Lines        2873     2873           
=======================================
  Hits         2706     2706           
  Misses        151      151           
  Partials       16       16           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	94.18% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Documents the known inconsistency between ChunkString and Chunk behavior for empty input, linking to the tracking issue.

Changes:

• Add notes in GoDoc (ChunkString), README, and generated docs pages describing empty-input behavior and linking to #788.
• Add inline TODO comments in ChunkString tests to capture the desired future behavior.
• Add an additional quote line to the docs Community page.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 8 out of 8 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
string.go	Adds GoDoc note about ChunkString("", n) returning a single empty string element.
it/string.go	Adds GoDoc note mirroring the core package behavior for iter sequences.
string_test.go	Adds TODO annotation documenting expected future change for empty input.
it/string_test.go	Same TODO annotation for the it variant test.
docs/data/core-chunk.md	Adds a “Note” section referencing the inconsistency and issue link.
docs/data/it-chunk.md	Adds a matching “Note” section for iterator docs.
README.md	Adds a note under ChunkString referencing the inconsistency and issue #788.
docs/src/pages/community.tsx	Adds an extra quote line to the Community page subtitle.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[Copilot]

The quote added to the Community page is unrelated to the PR’s stated purpose (documenting ChunkString inconsistency). Please move this change to a separate PR, or update the PR title/description to reflect the additional documentation/UI change.

[Copilot]

GoDoc comment uses ["]" / [] to describe return values, which isn’t valid Go slice syntax and can be confusing in generated documentation. Consider rewording to “returns a slice containing a single empty string” or use Go-style literals like []string{""} vs []string{} (or []T{...} for generics).

Suggested change

	// Note: lo.ChunkString and lo.Chunk functions behave inconsistently for empty input: lo.ChunkString("", n) returns [""] instead of [].
	// Note: lo.ChunkString and lo.Chunk functions behave inconsistently for empty input: lo.ChunkString("", n) returns a slice containing a single empty string instead of an empty slice.

[Copilot]

GoDoc comment uses ["]" / [] to describe return values, which isn’t Go syntax and can be confusing for Go users. Consider rewording or using Go-style slice literals (e.g., []string{""} vs []string{} / empty sequence).

Suggested change

	// Note: it.ChunkString and it.Chunk functions behave inconsistently for empty input: it.ChunkString("", n) returns [""] instead of [].
	// Note: it.ChunkString and it.Chunk behave inconsistently for empty input: it.ChunkString("", n) yields a single empty string (equivalent to []string{""}) instead of yielding no values (equivalent to an empty slice).

[Copilot]

This note mixes Go examples (above) with non-Go slice notation ([""] / []). For consistency and clarity in the README, consider using Go-style literals (e.g., []string{""} instead of []string{}) or describe it in words ("slice with one empty string" vs "empty slice").

Suggested change

	Note: `lo.ChunkString` and `lo.Chunk` functions behave inconsistently for empty input: `lo.ChunkString("", n)` returns `[""]` instead of `[]`. See [#788](https://github.com/samber/lo/issues/788).
	Note: `lo.ChunkString` and `lo.Chunk` functions behave inconsistently for empty input: `lo.ChunkString("", n)` returns `[]string{""}` instead of `[]string{}` (a slice with one empty string instead of an empty slice). See [#788](https://github.com/samber/lo/issues/788).