Skip to content
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

Changed dichotomize argument names #156

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

gshotwell
Copy link
Contributor

Closes #73

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 2, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #156 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 58.82%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #156   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   89.21%   89.21%           
=======================================
  Files          92       92           
  Lines        5478     5478           
=======================================
  Hits         4887     4887           
  Misses        591      591
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
R/AllGenerics.R 90.67% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
R/dichotomize.R 52.63% <50%> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update cdd0104...c8bc06c. Read the comment docs.

1 similar comment
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 2, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #156 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 58.82%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #156   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   89.21%   89.21%           
=======================================
  Files          92       92           
  Lines        5478     5478           
=======================================
  Hits         4887     4887           
  Misses        591      591
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
R/AllGenerics.R 90.67% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
R/dichotomize.R 52.63% <50%> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update cdd0104...c8bc06c. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@jonkeane jonkeane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@nealrichardson
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not sure that I agree that this is a good idea, for the reason I noted inline. Maybe there's a better way to improve the documentation, adding examples, etc.?

.dichotomize.var <- function (x, i) {
newcats <- dichotomize(categories(x), i)
categories(x) <- newcats
.dichotomize.var <- function (categories, selection) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is where I don't think categories as an argument makes sense: when the method/function is for a variable (or is defined both for Categories and CategoricalArrayVariable). categories(categories)?

@gshotwell
Copy link
Contributor Author

  • Print out example results in comments
  • Add see also to is.selected<- methods
  • Make arguments x and selections

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants