Added scalar object #9019
Added scalar object #9019
Conversation
| for (j in seq_along(templist)) { | ||
| if (is.list(templist[[j]]) || length(templist[[j]]) > 1) { | ||
| if (length(templist[[j]]) > 0) { | ||
| templist[[j]] <- | ||
| paste(names(templist[[j]]), " = ", templist[[j]], collapse = ", ") | ||
| } else { | ||
| next | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@N-thony are these changes required for this pull request? I couldn't understand how they relate to the scalars addition.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is more general and it fits the request by @rdstern mainly for displaying list elements in this way element1 = value1, element2 = value2, and so
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@N-thony kindly expound more. I'm not quite sure, what you mean by more general.
- Does it relate to how @rdstern wants all columns metadata to be displayed?
- Is there a comment that he wrote which you could point me to? or a sample screenshot of current and new implementation will be useful.
- Is this change required for the scalar feature?
If the change is not needed for the scalar feature and it affects other parts of the code base , I suggest we make this addition in a separate pull request, then we can test for any regression. If it has to be part of this pull request, because the scalar feature relies on it then I'm hope you and @rdstern have tested for regression in the potential parts that rely on this function.
Co-authored-by: patowhiz <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: patowhiz <[email protected]>
|
@N-thony and @Patowhiz I had not realised that was possible, but I have now tried it and I like it!
The mode is a troblesome summary, because it may not be unique! So for the yields there are 2 values and here they are. Wow - let's keep it, if I have understood correctly and this is the code you have been discussing! |
|
@rdstern, the feature you requested prompted @N-thony to make changes to a function used in other features related to column metadata. We are currently discussing whether the new presentation changes made by @N-thony are valid for those parts as well. I understand that you find them valid for Scalars, but do you also find them valid in other metadata areas that use the function? @N-thony, since you have identified the areas that require changes, could you help by checking where else the function you amended is being used? This would guide @rdstern and me on the areas we should test. I found this approach useful to @rdstern and saves everyone's time. |
@Patowhiz I don't think this concerns the column metadata, unless I'm missing something but as far as I know this is only for the |
@rdstern this replaces #9006. Have a look