-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
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
improve label functions #244
improve label functions #244
Conversation
Code Coverage Summary
Diff against main
Results for commit: 7bcdbb3 Minimum allowed coverage is ♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results |
Unit Tests Summary 1 files 15 suites 1s ⏱️ Results for commit 7bcdbb3. |
Unit Test Performance Difference
Additional test case details
Results for commit 4b796a8 ♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍 I hope there is no other data.frame
alike widely used class. We can always add it in the future if needed.
Rewrote
col_labels
,col_;labels<-
andcol_relabel
.All existing unit tests pass.
This is only a suggestion, the functions do their job properly. They have been copied from
formatters
, which is an argument against these changes.