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

group_by(.add) instead of group_by(add) #4137

Closed
romainfrancois opened this issue Jan 29, 2019 · 0 comments · Fixed by #4701
Closed

group_by(.add) instead of group_by(add) #4137

romainfrancois opened this issue Jan 29, 2019 · 0 comments · Fixed by #4701
Labels
feature grouping 👨‍👩‍👧‍👦
Milestone

Comments

@romainfrancois
Copy link
Member

romainfrancois commented Jan 29, 2019

originally in #4091 (comment)

The add argument in group_by() is inconsistent with .add arguments in group_by_[if,at,all]().

We should eventually have only .add but for a (possibly long interim) we could have both add and .add = add

@romainfrancois romainfrancois added this to the 0.9.0 milestone Jan 30, 2019
@hadley hadley added feature grouping 👨‍👩‍👧‍👦 labels Dec 11, 2019
hadley added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 6, 2020
In favour of correctly named .add argument. R CMD check doesn't check S3 method consistency for arguments after `...`, so this shouldn't cause problems with revdeps.

Fixes #4137
hadley added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 8, 2020
In favour of correctly named .add argument. R CMD check doesn't check S3 method consistency for arguments after `...`, so this shouldn't cause problems with revdeps.

Fixes #4137
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature grouping 👨‍👩‍👧‍👦
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants