-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closes #2265 update basket_select function #2411
Conversation
@bundfussr @bms63 would appreciate an initial QC of what I have done. I need to create some tickets for the failing unit tests, these are due to ERROR message updates in admiraldev (there may already be tickets for all/some of them). |
compare = actual_output, | ||
keys = c("PREFIX", "TERMCHAR") | ||
) | ||
}) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it possible to have a test for when a user does this incorrectly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Apologies - @millerg23 I gave a few cents here, but I'm not very familiar with these functions :(
Co-authored-by: Ben Straub <ben.x.straub@gsk.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks pretty good to me, would be nice to add @bms63 's suggestion of not properly providing appropriate inputs for ...
or some sort of break for the get_terms_fun
but I don't think its absolutely necessary, since it depends so much more on an appropriately built get_xxx()
function, we'll never be able to completely catch all the weird errors/use cases of user-built things like that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would not merge this PR before we have updated the get_terms()
function in admiralroche. Then we are sure that we didn't miss anything and that the new functionality works as expected.
Yes, it is still needed and it should be updated. I would display the extra arguments in the same way as the standard arguments, i.e., |
This Pull Request is stale because it has not been worked on in 15 days. |
Co-authored-by: Stefan Bundfuss <80953585+bundfussr@users.noreply.github.com>
I updated unit tests and |
BTW should I fix links in this MR, or is something going wrong elsewhere? Its not related to these changes. |
@bms63 myself and Stefan had a meeting, and with these updates it satisfies the Roche needs for company specific options. Let me know if I need to do anything else. |
Thank you for your Pull Request! We have developed this task checklist from the Development Process Guide to help with the final steps of the process. Completing the below tasks helps to ensure our reviewers can maximize their time on your code as well as making sure the admiral codebase remains robust and consistent.
Please check off each taskbox as an acknowledgment that you completed the task or check off that it is not relevant to your Pull Request. This checklist is part of the Github Action workflows and the Pull Request will not be merged into the
main
branch until you have checked off each task.styler::style_file()
to style R and Rmd filesinst/cheatsheet/admiral_cheatsheet.pptx
and re-upload a PDF version of it to the same folder.devtools::document()
so all.Rd
files in theman
folder and theNAMESPACE
file in the project root are updated appropriatelyNEWS.md
under the header# admiral (development version)
if the changes pertain to a user-facing function (i.e. it has an@export
tag) or documentation aimed at users (rather than developers)pkgdown::build_site()
and check that all affected examples are displayed correctly and that all new functions occur on the "Reference" page.lintr::lint_package()
R CMD check
locally and address all errors and warnings -devtools::check()