-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
extract.node doc update #102
Conversation
To test: switch to this branch, pull, build package, (depending on settings you may need to run It should look something like this. |
I think the function |
#'@export | ||
|
||
extract.node <- function(Rsim.output, group){ | ||
#Need to define variables to eliminate check() note about no visible binding |
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.
What does this comment mean?
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 have no idea
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.
@kaydin Any ideas?
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.
This is a wholly Sean function and not one that's been part of my own practical workflow. It is out-of-date in at least one way: it doesn't include fishing from input forcing (ForcedF and ForcedCatch) which e.g. is how most of the catch in our current Bering/GOA models is input. Before detail bugfixes, might be worth an overall review of this function in terms of use (if anyone on team is using this in actual workflow, would love to know).
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.
ok, so maybe we merge this (since it is just documentation) and then create an issue to look into it further and fix any issues. Even though the group may not use extract.node
, other R path users may use it. It has been in the package for a while
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'll reach out @slucey and see if he has time to explain
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.
@andybeet agree we should not wholly delete it, just need to make sure it's reporting what it says (at most, deprecate with warning if need be).
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.
ok, so maybe we merge this (since it is just documentation) and then create an issue to look into it further and fix any issues. Even though the group may not use
extract.node
, other R path users may use it. It has been in the package for a while
I like that idea! I have also never used this function before for what that's worth.
Files updated
Extract.r
- this contains theextract.node()
functionDetails
NOTE: The
Discard
item in the returned list has duplicate field names. (See discussion 103).I created this PR for just the one function, as a test, to make sure i was doing what you were hoping i would. Please let me know if you are expecting anything else/different