Linting

[seabbs]

Adds new linters, adds a changed file only listing action, deals with linting issues across the package (aside from nested ifelse - making a help wanted issue), adds an action for rendering the README, cleans up install instructions, goes quietly mad in a corner.

[sbfnk]

This is going to mess with ongoing deveopment in open PRs (especially #363) - might be worth waiting for that and then running the linter?

[seabbs]

This is going to mess with ongoing deveopment in open PRs (especially #363) - might be worth waiting for that and then running the linter?

I did this manually. I am happy to deal with merge issues (also manually) what a dream.

I think we need to get the code base in a nice clean place to enable rapid iteration. Having good linting etc will help avoid building in more technical debt. Especially if others are going to make contributions.

[sbfnk]

I did this manually. I am happy to deal with merge issues (also manually) what a dream.

Ah it's fine I'll manage I'm sure. Just might involve some cursing.

I think we need to get the code base in a nice clean place to enable rapid iteration. Having good linting etc will help avoid building in more technical debt. Especially if others are going to make contributions.

Completely agree.

[seabbs]

okay I was not expecting the merge queue to do that...

[seabbs]

I assumed it would wait for checks 😭

[github-actions]

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if 9bc622a is merged into main:

• ❗🐌default: 53s -> 5.57m [+457.36%, +603.41%]
• ❗🐌no_delays: 44.6s -> 4.5m [+432.73%, +577.94%]
• ❗🐌random_walk: 15.6s -> 30.1s [+75.09%, +112.32%]
• ❗🐌stationary: 37.2s -> 3.71m [+357.31%, +640.01%]
• ❗🐌uncertain: 55s -> 5.74m [+392.33%, +661.5%]
  Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

[Bisaloo]

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if 9bc622a is merged into main:

• ❗🐌default: 53s -> 5.57m [+457.36%, +603.41%]

• ❗🐌no_delays: 44.6s -> 4.5m [+432.73%, +577.94%]

• ❗🐌random_walk: 15.6s -> 30.1s [+75.09%, +112.32%]

• ❗🐌stationary: 37.2s -> 3.71m [+357.31%, +640.01%]

• ❗🐌uncertain: 55s -> 5.74m [+392.33%, +661.5%]
  Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

This is likely not correct and just due to the update to R 4.3.0 and the fact that the entire package cache needed to be rebuilt.