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

Function #14

Merged
merged 31 commits into from
Dec 25, 2024
Merged

Function #14

merged 31 commits into from
Dec 25, 2024

Conversation

drmowinckels
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 14, 2023

Thank you!

Thank you for your pull request 😃

🤖 This automated message can help you check the rendered files in your submission for clarity. If you have any questions, please feel free to open an issue in {sandpaper}.

If you have files that automatically render output (e.g. R Markdown), then you should check for the following:

  • 🎯 correct output
  • 🖼️ correct figures
  • ❓ new warnings
  • ‼️ new errors

Rendered Changes

🔍 Inspect the changes: https://github.com/carpentries-incubator/targets-workshop/compare/md-outputs..md-outputs-PR-14

The following changes were observed in the rendered markdown documents:

 basic-targets.md    |   9 ++-
 config.yaml         |   1 +
 functions.md (new)  | 229 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 instructor-notes.md |   7 ++
 md5sum.txt          |   7 +-
 5 files changed, 246 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
What does this mean?

If you have source files that require output and figures to be generated (e.g. R Markdown), then it is important to make sure the generated figures and output are reproducible.

This output provides a way for you to inspect the output in a diff-friendly manner so that it's easy to see the changes that occur due to new software versions or randomisation.

⏱️ Updated at 2024-12-24 08:52:11 +0000

@joelnitta
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks @drmowinckels !

I just have one concern with the PR: I'm not sure it's a good idea to use the Extract Function RStudio tool. On one hand, I can see how it demonstrates conversion of non-function code to a function. But on the other hand, it adds cognitive load because the learner has to grasp a new tool. If it worked without further modification I would probably say it's worth it. But it requires additional fiddling, hence additional cognitive load (explanation of NSE). So I think it might be better to leave it out and just focus on manual conversion to a function. Extract function actually strikes me as a tool for advanced users who probably can already write their own functions. It is a shortcut that speeds things up a bit, but you still have to know what you are doing to use it.

@drmowinckels
Copy link
Contributor Author

That's an excellent point! Its actually really good tool when dealing with stuff that has standard evaluation, but for the example we have, indeed it ends up being more to explain than necessary.

I'll omit that part.

@drmowinckels
Copy link
Contributor Author

I added some info about the tool in a callout. I couldnt get it rendering locally (some os lib issues I need to fix). But I thought it was worth having a look at it like that, and then delete if it still looks confusing.

github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 24, 2024
@joelnitta joelnitta merged commit 29a3840 into carpentries-incubator:main Dec 25, 2024
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants