[R-pkg-devel] Interpret feedback: not write testthat-tests in examples

Maëlle SALMON m@e||e@@@|mon @end|ng |rom y@hoo@@e
Fri Jul 17 09:29:33 CEST 2020

If you do want to communicate around tests a bit more, without cluttering the manual, you might find the covrpage package interesting https://yonicd.github.io/covrpage/ 
It creates a README in the tests folder, with test results, and it can create a vignette with the same content.
  On dj., jul. 16, 2020 at 19:40, Henrik Bengtsson<henrik.bengtsson using gmail.com> wrote:   If the point of having, say,

stopifnot(add(1, 2) == sum(c(1, 2))

is to make it explicit to the reader that your add() function gives
the same results as sum(), then I argue that is valid to use in an
example.  I'm pretty sure I've used that in some of my examples.  For
the purpose, there should be no reason why you can't use other
"assert" functions for this purpose, e.g.

testthat::expect_equal(add(1, 2), sum(c(1, 2))

Now, if the point of your "assert" statement is only to validate your
package/code, then I agree it should not be in the example code
because it adds clutter.  Such validation should be in a package test.

So, if the former, I suggest you reply to the CRAN Team and explain this.


On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 6:28 AM Richel Bilderbeek
<richel using richelbilderbeek.nl> wrote:
> Dear R package developers,
> I would enjoy some help regarding some feedback I got on my package from a CRAN volunteer, as I am unsure how to interpret this correctly.
> This is the feedback I got (I added '[do]'):
> > Please [do] not write testthat-tests in your examples.
> I wonder if this is about using `testthat` or using tests in general.
> To simplify the context, say I wrote a package with a function called `add`, that adds two numbers. My example code would then be something like this:
> ```
> library(testthat)
> expect_equal(add(1, 2), 3)
> ```
> The first interpretation is about using `testthat`: maybe I should use base R (`stopifnot`) or another testing library (`testit`) or hand-craft it myself?
> The second interpretation is about using tests in example code. I like to actively demonstrate that my code works as expected. I checked the policies regarding examples, and I could not find a rule that I should refrain from doing so.
> What is the correct response to this feedback?
> Thanks for your guidance, Richel Bilderbeek
> ______________________________________________
> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel

R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

More information about the R-package-devel mailing list