Issue #809 - Replace is.logical by isTRUE

[nikosbosse]

Description

This PR closes #809.

Doe what it says on the tin. Purpose is improving robustness and code clarity.

Checklist

• My PR is based on a package issue and I have explicitly linked it.
• I have included the target issue or issues in the PR title as follows: issue-number: PR title
• I have tested my changes locally.
• I have added or updated unit tests where necessary.
• I have updated the documentation if required.
• I have built the package locally and run rebuilt docs using roxygen2.
• My code follows the established coding standards and I have run lintr::lint_package() to check for style issues introduced by my changes.
• I have added a news item linked to this PR.
• I have reviewed CI checks for this PR and addressed them as far as I am able.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 95.54%. Comparing base (fbfbe56) to head (e62a20a).

❗ Current head e62a20a differs from pull request most recent head 7f26674

Please upload reports for the commit 7f26674 to get more accurate results.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #815   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.54%   95.54%           
=======================================
  Files          21       21           
  Lines        1570     1573    +3     
=======================================
+ Hits         1500     1503    +3     
  Misses         70       70           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[nikosbosse]

I think historically we didn't enforce r 3.5 or something like that. Or I was stupid:D

…

On Sun, 19 May 2024, 15:04 James Azam, ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In R/check-input-helpers.R <#815 (comment)> : > - return(is.logical(check)) + return(isTRUE(check)) Mmhhh interesting! Why was is.logical() use here? it returns TRUE for both TRUE and FALSE whereas isTRUE will only returns TRUE for a value of TRUE. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#815 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJBYFLLMQFPSQP4I4AWLSQTZDCPOLAVCNFSM6AAAAABH6EUGM6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDANRVGA3TKMRTGM> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[jamesmbaazam]

I think historically we didn't enforce r 3.5 or something like that. Or I was stupid:D
…
On Sun, 19 May 2024, 15:04 James Azam, @.> wrote: @.* commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In R/check-input-helpers.R <#815 (comment)> : > - return(is.logical(check)) + return(isTRUE(check)) Mmhhh interesting! Why was is.logical() use here? it returns TRUE for both TRUE and FALSE whereas isTRUE will only returns TRUE for a value of TRUE. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#815 (review)>, or unsubscribe <github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJBYFLLMQFPSQP4I4AWLSQTZDCPOLAVCNFSM6AAAAABH6EUGM6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDANRVGA3TKMRTGM> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: @.***>

I think it is unlikely to have caused any bugs unless in edge cases that I can't imagine atm, since "check" is either a string or TRUE. But the isTRUE() replace here is safer.

[jamesmbaazam]

Jumping here to review this.

LGTM.

[nikosbosse]

Lovely, thank you!