From d83bd08d4d83253a5ebcb4ca06023d43602dc431 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: clawbot <clawbot@noreply.git.eeqj.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 21:41:25 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] style: fix prettier formatting in constructor naming section

---
 prompts/CODE_STYLEGUIDE_GO.md | 14 +++++++-------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/prompts/CODE_STYLEGUIDE_GO.md b/prompts/CODE_STYLEGUIDE_GO.md
index 58a72ff..6794ed5 100644
--- a/prompts/CODE_STYLEGUIDE_GO.md
+++ b/prompts/CODE_STYLEGUIDE_GO.md
@@ -138,13 +138,13 @@ last_modified: 2026-02-22
 
 1.  Constructors **must** be called `New()`. `modulename.New()` works great if
     you name the packages properly. If the constructor creates an instance from
-    an existing value or representation, `From<Something>()` (e.g. `FromBytes()`,
-    `FromConfig()`) is also acceptable. If the package contains multiple types
-    and `New()` is ambiguous, `NewThing()` is occasionally acceptable — but
-    prefer restructuring packages so each type gets its own package and a plain
-    `New()`. Do not invent creative constructor names like `Create()`, `Make()`,
-    `Build()`, `Open()` (unless wrapping an OS resource), or `Init()`. If you
-    see a constructor with a non-standard name, rename it.
+    an existing value or representation, `From<Something>()` (e.g.
+    `FromBytes()`, `FromConfig()`) is also acceptable. If the package contains
+    multiple types and `New()` is ambiguous, `NewThing()` is occasionally
+    acceptable — but prefer restructuring packages so each type gets its own
+    package and a plain `New()`. Do not invent creative constructor names like
+    `Create()`, `Make()`, `Build()`, `Open()` (unless wrapping an OS resource),
+    or `Init()`. If you see a constructor with a non-standard name, rename it.
 
 1.  Don't make packages too big. Break them up.