Prefer multiple functions with convenient syntax #82
Conversation
|
Still needs more documentation work to steer people towards |
|
I had seen your initial message; I had got so far as to think it could be called The interface is exactly what I had in mind, with the bonus of specifying either |
#Conflicts: # R/disambiguate.R # R/prefer.R
| #' conflicts_prefer( | ||
| #' dplyr::filter(), | ||
| #' dplyr::lag(), | ||
| #' ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might be nice to show the other form in the examples, because i think that is what I'd personally prefer, but it is likely a little confusing to newish R users
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's also harder to type the form without parens because of autocomplete. But I'll add an example.
| #' dplyr::lag(), | ||
| #' ) | ||
| conflicts_prefer <- function(..., .quiet = FALSE) { | ||
| calls <- exprs(...) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
exprs() vs enexprs()? not sure if it matters, we don't capture pure expressions often
| is_ok <- vapply(calls, is_ns_call, logical(1)) | ||
| if (any(!is_ok)) { | ||
| cli::cli_abort( | ||
| "All arguments must be in form {.code pkg::fun} or {.fn pkg::fun}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oops and I need to test it.
| #' You can either declare a specific pairing (i.e. `dplyr::filter()` beats | ||
| #' `base::filter()`), or an overall winner (i.e. `dplyr::filter()` beats | ||
| #' all comers). | ||
| #' all comers). As conflicted 1.2.0, in most case you should use |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As _of_ conflicted 1.2.0, in most case_s_ you
| #> Either pick the one you want with `::`: | ||
| #> • dplyr::filter | ||
| #> • stats::filter | ||
| #> Or declare a preference with `conflict_prefer()`: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you want to mention conflicts_prefer() here
Fixes #77
@ijlyttle what do you think of this interface? I'm slightly concerned that
conflicts_prefer()might be confusingly close toconflict_prefer().