Move name repair to vctrs #464
Labels
vctrs ↗️
Requires vctrs package
Comments
|
Not sure. Names have unique problems (e.g. |
|
And those problems also arise with lists. |
|
Of course, I was confused. Would you like me to submit a PR there? Can we get vctrs to CRAN in the next few weeks? |
|
No, this is a long term project. |
krlmlr
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 30, 2018
Fixes #463 Exposure (or lack thereof) of syntactic argument in tibble() and as_tibble() Fixes #461 Advertise .tidy_names Fixed #446 Justify tidy_names --- Other name-related tibble issues * Finalize interface of `.name_repair = <A_FUNCTION>` #476 *let's decide/discuss there* * tibble doesn't make it easy to get variable names that match our style guide #472 *let's solve in follow-up PR* * names<- method should protect against invalid names #466 *let's solve in follow-up PR* * Move name repair to vctrs #464 *PR lays groundwork for this long-term goal* * revisit strategy for making names syntactic #459 *let's solve in follow-up PR* * Re-encode character columns and column names to UTF-8 #87 *relevant, but I don't touch this* Related issue in [tidyverse/principles](https://github.com/tidyverse/principles): * [Vector names](tidyverse/design#4) --- Overview: * Defines and motivates 3 levels of repaired names: - `minimal`: not `NULL`, no `NA`s, à la `rlang::names2()` - `unique`: `minimal` + no `""`s and no dupes (cf `tidy_names(syntactic = FALSE)`) - `syntactic`: `unique` + syntactic (cf `tidy_names(syntactic = TRUE)`) * Internal utility functions for each level of name repair, i.e. all combinations of "repair vs check" and "operate on the names vs the named vector". * `tibble()` and `as_tibble()` expose name repair via `.name_repair`. Replaces `.tidy_names` (piloted only in dev) and `as_tibble(..., validate = TRUE/FALSE)` (in CRAN version). * Default behaviour (`.name_repair = "assert_unique")`): do no repair but check that the names are `unique`. * `.name_repair = "none"` means just make sure the names are `minimal` * `.name_repair = "unique"` and `.name_repair = "syntactic"` mean what you think * `.name_repair` can also take a user-supplied function. --- To discuss: * ~Should `valid` just be `unique`?~ YES and I have made it so in the source. * Let us review the "names degrees of freedom" and facilities offered by base, tidyverse for independent control: - exist or not - unique or not - syntactic or not * Automatic naming, based on expression. We currently offer no control over this in `tibble()`. * How much to reveal re: long-term plans. For example, why `tidy_names()` and `set_tidy_names()` are still here, but haven't gained the obvious counterparts like `unique_names()` and `set_syntactic_names()`. Do we need a Life Cycle section in the docs? * My backwards compatibility report
|
Or possibly rlang. cc @lionel- |
|
Is this connected to r-lib/rlang#651? |
|
Yes, that's part of it, but probably all of the name management strategies should move to rlang. |
|
Blocked, unclear how to implement |
krlmlr
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 17, 2019
- Delegate name repair to vctrs (#464).
|
This old thread has been automatically locked. If you think you have found something related to this, please open a new issue and link to this old issue if necessary. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
It seems like maybe name repair is more properly the domain of vctrs, since we'll want to be able to apply the same strategies when concatenating vectors.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: