Question: Is magrittr "%>%" acceptable in bioc packages?
0
gravatar for venu
3 months 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 • 104 views
ADD COMMENTlink modified 3 months ago by Martin Morgan ♦♦ 24k • written 3 months ago by venu0
Answer: Is magrittr "%>%" acceptable in bioc packages?
2
gravatar for Aaron Lun
3 months ago by
Aaron Lun25k
Cambridge, United Kingdom
Aaron Lun25k 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 3 months ago by Aaron Lun25k

Thanks Aaron, I will ask at mailing list.

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

ADD REPLYlink written 3 months ago by venu0
Answer: Is magrittr "%>%" acceptable in bioc packages?
0
gravatar for Martin Morgan
3 months ago by
Martin Morgan ♦♦ 24k
United States
Martin Morgan ♦♦ 24k 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 3 months ago by Martin Morgan ♦♦ 24k

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 3 months 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: 343 users visited in the last hour