Question: Is magrittr "%>%" acceptable in bioc packages?
0
gravatar for venu
4 weeks ago by
venu0
venu0 wrote:

Hi,

As the title says, is %>% acceptable in bioc packages? With BiocCheck, I get a WARNING that is "Add non-empty \\value sections to the following man pages: man/pipe.Rd".

Is it okay even if this warning appears or should hack it to suppress?

Thank you.

R bioconductor • 81 views
ADD COMMENTlink modified 4 weeks ago by Martin Morgan ♦♦ 23k • written 4 weeks ago by venu0
Answer: Is magrittr "%>%" acceptable in bioc packages?
2
gravatar for Aaron Lun
4 weeks ago by
Aaron Lun24k
Cambridge, United Kingdom
Aaron Lun24k wrote:

Ah, that's a raw nerve right there.

This question is better placed in the Bioc-devel mailing list, which is where all topics of discussion for package development should go. The support site is intended for users to ask questions about... well, using the packages.

But FWIW, no.

ADD COMMENTlink written 4 weeks ago by Aaron Lun24k

Thanks Aaron, I will ask at mailing list.

But FWIW, no. - you mean, I can't use pipe in bioc packages?

ADD REPLYlink written 4 weeks ago by venu0
Answer: Is magrittr "%>%" acceptable in bioc packages?
0
gravatar for Martin Morgan
4 weeks ago by
Martin Morgan ♦♦ 23k
United States
Martin Morgan ♦♦ 23k wrote:

The complaint is about a missing \value{} section, which in roxygen-speak is a missing @return tag in the documentation chunk that creates the 'pipe.Rd' man page.

ADD COMMENTlink written 4 weeks ago by Martin Morgan ♦♦ 23k

I get the problem is due to @return tag, we use pipe in many different settings, just wondering what to write with @return. R CMD check didn't complain about it. As Aaron suggested above, I will ask the question at mailing list. Thank you.

ADD REPLYlink written 4 weeks ago by venu0
Please log in to add an answer.

Help
Access

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 16.09
Traffic: 196 users visited in the last hour