Added counts with percentages option to summary function in Describe > Specific Tables/Graphs > Summary Tables dialog

[lilyclements]

@africanmathsinitiative/developers @rdstern this is ready to review.

This PR adds a parameter to include counts with percentages in summary function called include_counts_with_percentage as discussed in #7621.
This is default FALSE, but when TRUE, includes the counts when percentages are chosen.

E.g.

survey <- data_book$get_data_frame(data_name="survey")
multiple_receiver_cols <- c("village", "variety")
list_of_tables  <- survey %>% purrr::map(.x=multiple_receiver_cols,
                                         .f= ~ dplyr::select(.data=data_book$summary_table(data_name="survey", percentage_type="factors", perc_total_factors="fertgrp",
                                                                                           include_counts_with_percentage = TRUE,
                                                                                           summaries=c("summary_count"), include_margins = TRUE, factors=c("fertgrp", .x)), c(1, by_var=2, 3, 4))) %>% purrr::map(.x=., .f= ~ mmtable2::mmtable(data=.x, cells=value) + mmtable2::header_top_left(variable='by_var') + mmtable2::header_left_top(variable="fertgrp"))

gives:

Whereas

survey <- data_book$get_data_frame(data_name="survey")
multiple_receiver_cols <- c("village", "variety")
list_of_tables  <- survey %>% purrr::map(.x=multiple_receiver_cols,
                                         .f= ~ dplyr::select(.data=data_book$summary_table(data_name="survey", percentage_type="factors", perc_total_factors="fertgrp",
                                                                                           summaries=c("summary_count"), include_margins = TRUE, factors=c("fertgrp", .x)), c(1, by_var=2, 3, 4))) %>% purrr::map(.x=., .f= ~ mmtable2::mmtable(data=.x, cells=value) + mmtable2::header_top_left(variable='by_var') + mmtable2::header_left_top(variable="fertgrp"))

gives:

[lloyddewit]

@rdstern if you can test/approve, then we can merge
@lilyclements is there an R developer who should peer review this PR?
Thanks

[lilyclements]

@N-thony who do you suggest should peer review this PR?

[N-thony]

@lloyddewit even though I'm not strong in R but I did a quick look of this with Lily and I'm convinced everything is okay. Over to you.

[lloyddewit]

@N-thony thank you for the review.
@rdstern if you can test/approve, then we can merge, thanks

[rdstern]

@lloyddewit I am happy to approve if the code is ok, but I can't check, until the dialogue is changed to allow more than one of these summaries to be included. @lilyclements I wonder who will do this - perhaps choose someone at the workshop this week?

[lloyddewit]

@lilyclements what's the reason you closed this? do you plan to implement in a new PR? thanks

[lilyclements]

@lilyclements what's the reason you closed this? do you plan to implement in a new PR? thanks

@lloyddewit Ah was an accident when deleting old branches! Thanks for pointing this one out!