You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As discussed with Logan, update the @param documentation for the f parameter in epi_slide. The following are the points to address:
Instead of “If a function, f must take x, a data frame with the same column names as the original object; followed by any number of named arguments; and ending with ...“, the proper thing may be that f should take x, g/k/key/think-of-a-better-name, and named args (dots don’t seem necessary; I think originally they were just there to absorb the unlisted g).
Correct "same column names as the original object" --- we might only get the non-grouping columns here. [This raises a separate issue. We are feeding the user an epi_df via f that might not have the geo_value column as one might expect. Hopefully we can get away with it, but maybe this needs to be a proper epi_df or just a tibble instead.]
If you think it clarifies things, change “named arguments” -> “named arguments (which will be taken from ...)“.
Make sure that the description of g above matches/resembles how ?group_modify describes such a parameter, if it makes sense.
In the docs for the f being a formula case, describe .y in the same manner as g, if .y can indeed be used [I'm guessing that it is usable].
Still see remnants of the old docs somehow. [In slide.Rmd rather than slide.R. I must have used these slide.Rmd text as the basis for another slide.R doc update causing a reversion on a feature branch.]
As discussed with Logan, update the
@param
documentation for thef
parameter inepi_slide
. The following are the points to address:f
must takex
, a data frame with the same column names as the original object; followed by any number of named arguments; and ending with...
“, the proper thing may be thatf
should takex
,g
/k
/key
/think-of-a-better-name
, and named args (dots don’t seem necessary; I think originally they were just there to absorb the unlistedg
).epi_df
viaf
that might not have the geo_value column as one might expect. Hopefully we can get away with it, but maybe this needs to be a properepi_df
or just atibble
instead.]...
)“.g
above matches/resembles how?group_modify
describes such a parameter, if it makes sense.f
being a formula case, describe.y
in the same manner asg
, if.y
can indeed be used [I'm guessing that it is usable].Originally mentioned in PR #85.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: