Skip to content
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

Clean up brmsfit objects #470

Open
5 tasks
paul-buerkner opened this issue Jul 6, 2018 · 4 comments
Open
5 tasks

Clean up brmsfit objects #470

paul-buerkner opened this issue Jul 6, 2018 · 4 comments
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@paul-buerkner
Copy link
Owner

paul-buerkner commented Jul 6, 2018

Currently, brmsfit objects store some information multiple times at different places to retain backwards compatibility with older versions of brms. In version 3.0 (still a long way to go), we should take the opportunity to clean that up. This will include the following changes:

  • Update formula following the changes in Restructure brmsformula objects #476.
  • remove elements family and autocor as they are natively stored inside the formula element.
  • remove element ranef as it can be easily computed from formula and data without much computational overhead.
  • make data.name an attribute of data.
  • remove deprecated element stan_funs.
@paul-buerkner paul-buerkner added this to the brms 3.0 milestone Jul 6, 2018
@strengejacke
Copy link

Just a quick thought: Do you really want to remove ranef()? I think this is a convenient shortcut, and it helps other people writing generic functions that work for brms, lme4 or glmmTMB.

@paul-buerkner
Copy link
Owner Author

You may be right. I don't like updating it for old objects whenever I add a new multilevel feature, but I think this is acceptable if its helpful for users or developers.

@paul-buerkner
Copy link
Owner Author

@strengejacke Did you understood my OP as if I wanted to remove the ranef() method? That's not what I ment. Instead I talked about the $ranef element of brmsfit objects which contains information about the "random" effects structure not posterior samples for the corresponding parameters.

@strengejacke
Copy link

Ok, yes, than I misunderstood you in first place.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants