Replace get functions with examples for delay distributions

[sbfnk]

Fixes #390.

Also introduces a fix_dist function for removing the uncertainty from delay distributions(😲).

[seabbs]

Content-wise this looks good. I think it goes a bit far the other way in that there are now no examples of using dist_spec. In particular, in the README some of the text doesn't really make any sense and some parts of the code just show rather pointless reallocation.

The example reporting delay also has no uncertainty which alters a fair number of the examples and tests where it was used. Perhaps we could just have two or have it be uncertain and use the new helper function to make it have no uncertainty (which is a very nice addition).

[sbfnk]

Content-wise this looks good. I think it goes a bit far the other way in that there are now no examples of using dist_spec. In particular, in the README some of the text doesn't really make any sense and some parts of the code just show rather pointless reallocation.

That makes sense. I'm not sure what the right balance is, or if we even want/need these examples. Will revisit starting from where you pointed out it being an issue.

The example reporting delay also has no uncertainty which alters a fair number of the examples and tests where it was used. Perhaps we could just have two or have it be uncertain and use the new helper function to make it have no uncertainty (which is a very nice addition).

Yes I think if we make it uncertain (which may have been my original intention) the rest of the code makes sense.

[github-actions]

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if 1a634ff is merged into main:

•   :ballot_box_with_check:default: 47.6s -> 44.1s [-18.9%, +4.09%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:no_delays: 47.7s -> 44.8s [-19.22%, +6.85%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:random_walk: 13.5s -> 13.7s [-7.69%, +10.55%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:stationary: 28.5s -> 28s [-14.38%, +10.72%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:uncertain: 1.02m -> 1.05m [-7.65%, +14.44%]
  Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

[github-actions]

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if 8a1117a is merged into main:

•   :ballot_box_with_check:default: 48.8s -> 49.4s [-9.31%, +12.07%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:no_delays: 47.9s -> 44.9s [-19.13%, +6.74%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:random_walk: 14.2s -> 14s [-8.68%, +5.61%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:stationary: 29s -> 27.3s [-15.26%, +3.82%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:uncertain: 1.14m -> 1.04m [-21.41%, +4.03%]
  Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

[github-actions]

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if 0026e85 is merged into main:

•   :ballot_box_with_check:default: 1.05m -> 58.9s [-22.38%, +8.33%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:no_delays: 1m -> 1.06m [-13.77%, +24.87%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:random_walk: 18.6s -> 18s [-20.92%, +14.11%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:stationary: 36.6s -> 37.3s [-10.72%, +14.61%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:uncertain: 1.3m -> 1.38m [-8.68%, +21.13%]
  Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

[github-actions]

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if 7d96a29 is merged into main:

•   :ballot_box_with_check:default: 42.1s -> 45.3s [-9.19%, +24.33%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:no_delays: 45.9s -> 43.4s [-21.14%, +10.15%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:random_walk: 14.5s -> 14.1s [-13.97%, +8.47%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:stationary: 27.5s -> 28.2s [-6.09%, +11.54%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:uncertain: 1.16m -> 1.18m [-18.93%, +22.86%]
  Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

[seabbs]

Overall looks good but it looks like lazy loading isn't working as expected when combining distributions or directly specifiying them as args. See the rendered version of the epinow vignette for an example. It may be that they need to be explicitly allocated? A little confused about why that would be the case though? Perhaps due to not having the dev version of the package installed and rendering directly rather than using devtools?

[github-actions]

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if fd5acc2 is merged into main:

•   :ballot_box_with_check:default: 49.1s -> 49.3s [-14.5%, +15.5%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:no_delays: 48.2s -> 44.7s [-23.41%, +8.98%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:random_walk: 14.3s -> 13.8s [-10.78%, +2.67%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:stationary: 28.3s -> 28.8s [-5%, +8.43%]
•   :ballot_box_with_check:uncertain: 1.02m -> 1.15m [-0.66%, +26.78%]
  Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

[sbfnk]

This is ready for re-review. Note touchstone failure is expecting as the corresponding scripts have changed.

[seabbs]

LGTM. Small grammar suggestion and flagging some maybe transient fitting issues in the README (I think this should be its own issue if they start around).

[seabbs]

Looks much improved.