Meet specification more fully (i.e. enable more strict tests)

[jmuhlenkamp]

This is a pull request for #543 (also general strict tests issue #450).

Would appreciate some feedback on how I am setting the default arguments for augment.betareg as it feels a bit awkward (see below for snippet).

augment.betareg <- function(x, data = model.frame(x), newdata = NULL,
                            type.predict, type.residuals, ...) {
                            type.predict = eval(formals(betareg:::predict.betareg)$type),
                            type.residuals = eval(formals(betareg:::residuals.betareg)$type),
                            ...) {

[alexpghayes]

This is awesome! I'm swamped with school at the moment but will try to take a look soon!

[alexpghayes]

This is really really awesome! Thank you!

For augment.betareg() I would either:

• use c("response", "link", "precision", "variance", "quantile") for type.predict
• use c("sweighted2", "deviance", "pearson", "response", "weighted", "sweighted") for type.predict

The concern is then what happens if betareg changes these options are no longer correct. To address this you could write some tests to make sure all these options work.

Alternatively, you could use NULL for the default and then use something like:

type.predict <- match.arg(type.predict, choices = formals(betareg:::predict.betareg)$type)

in the body of the function. I think the first option is preferable, although I'm not totally sure.

[jmuhlenkamp]

When I get a chance, I'll implement the first option, add a basic test for each option, update the NEWS, and then this PR should be ready to be merged. Will let you know.

[jmuhlenkamp]

This should now be ready to be merged. Let me know if there is anything I need to do.

[alexpghayes]

Added some comments!

[jmuhlenkamp]

Thanks! From a quick look, all the comments make sense and should be pretty minor changes. Will try to push updates in the next few days. Will let you know.

[jmuhlenkamp]

All comments resolved via new commits. Ready for another review and/or merge.

[alexpghayes]

I know it's been forever, and I'm sorry! This is on my TODO list again!

[alexpghayes]

Looking good! Added some comments!

[alexpghayes]

Finally followed up!

[jmuhlenkamp]

Thanks! I added one comment to close out the kmeans discussion, but I should be good to make the requested change(s) now. :-)

[jmuhlenkamp]

@alexpghayes added two commits that close out the open review items. If this PR is good now, I can work to resolve the merge conflicts and/or merge master into my branch. Let me know. Also, I'm not too familiar with the CI build fails, I believe some previous changes from master that I merged into my branch are causing this, but I am not sure.

Let me know how you'd like to me proceed to keep this moving along. Thanks!

[alexpghayes]

Sorry that I've let this sit so long. If you resolve merge conflicts and ping me I'll make sure to review quickly.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically closed due to inactivity.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically locked. If you believe the issue addressed here persists, please file a new PR (with a reprex: https://reprex.tidyverse.org) and link to this one.