-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
double-dot notation for formula #41
Comments
Very happy that you like it. A quick thought from my phone, will test
later: we could move the validation of ..vars from definition to generation
but keep the other sanity checks (dist, valid arithmetic formula etc) that
should solve your issue and would make sense I think.
|
Yeah we can just move these and similar block in the other .check* functions into a sepreate function and use the new error system too. Lines 773 to 805 in bfcecd6
|
I noticed you never reacted to my second comment - was that intentional? Too hard to deal with? |
:D I will check it out once we moved the checks but I assume it has something to do with execution environments... |
This was referenced Sep 25, 2020
Closed
Closed
Closed
assignUser
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 2, 2020
This allows for non defined external vars to be used in data defs fixes double-dot notation for formula #41
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The double-dot notation for external variable reference is awesome. A couple of things.
(1) In my workflow, I often put the data definitions at the top, and it seems natural to sometimes first reference the external below
(2) The strength of the double-dot notation is how it makes dynamic data definition so easy. To generate different data sets in R using different assumptions, there are at least two ways. The first approach, using for loops, works fine, but I find it a little clunky and a bit less amenable to parallelization. (And, by the way, this is the perfect kind of case where it doesn't make sense to introduce
age_effect
before creatingdef
. In fact, it is just not possible - except to create a dummy version ofage_effect
, which is not so appealing. But, maybe there's no way around this.I prefer to use lapply or mclapply - seems more compact and faster than the for loop, especially when doing 1000's of replications. But it doesn't work - and not sure how how hard it would be to make it work.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: