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
Make augment.factanal() more robust. Fixes #604. #650
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks good. I believe the new column names are a breaking change from the previous factor1
, ..., factorn
. Can you:
- Add a note in
NEWS
about the breaking change in column names - Add quick regression tests
@alexpghayes Done! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added some more thoughts
@alexpghayes Done! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added some more comments. Thanks for cranking all these out!
@alexpghayes All comments addressed. |
This pull request has been automatically locked. If you believe you have found a related problem, please file a new issue (with a reprex: https://reprex.tidyverse.org) and link to this issue. |
I have also updated the examples to reflect how specifying different scoring methods won't break any of the methods.
Here is a reprex:
Created on 2019-03-10 by the reprex package (v0.2.1.9000)