simulate event data (#259)

[gravesti]

Feature branch to add data simulation

Open issues

• [x] basic implementation
• [x] add tests
• [x] constructor for DataSimEnrollment objects
• [x] method to combine create_baseline_objects, maybe c()?
• [x] getter for SimDataList@data_list[[i]]
• [x] setter for additional transformations
• [x] check enrolment times are postive, add warning

• [x] only allow 1 drift?

[mattsecrest]

@gravesti just wondering around naming. This is the UI in my understanding (prepping for investigator meeting):

Do you agree w/ this UI? If so, I wonder if set_transformations() and set_event_dist() make more sense? Same thought for the DataSimEnrollment constructor. Maybe set_data_sim_enrollment()?

[codecov-commenter]

Welcome to Codecov :tada:

Once you merge this PR into your default branch, you're all set! Codecov will compare coverage reports and display results in all future pull requests.

Thanks for integrating Codecov - We've got you covered :open_umbrella:

[gravesti]

@gravesti just wondering around naming. This is the UI in my understanding (prepping for investigator meeting):

Do you agree w/ this UI? If so, I wonder if set_transformations() and set_event_dist() make more sense? Same thought for the DataSimEnrollment constructor. Maybe set_data_sim_enrollment()?

• we could change add_transformations to set_transformations 👍
• From this UI all the set_* functions are optional I think.
• Whereas anDataSimEvent object is required for create_data_simulation(). Maybe event_dist() should be create_event_dist()
• We have the DataSimEnrollment constructor for custom enrollment functions. These would still be used with set_enrollment(). I don't know if set_data_sim_enrollment() is friendlier?

[mattsecrest]

@gravesti just wondering around naming. This is the UI in my understanding (prepping for investigator meeting): Do you agree w/ this UI? If so, I wonder if set_transformations() and set_event_dist() make more sense? Same thought for the DataSimEnrollment constructor. Maybe set_data_sim_enrollment()?

• we could change add_transformations to set_transformations 👍
• From this UI all the set_* functions are optional I think.
• Whereas anDataSimEvent object is required for create_data_simulation(). Maybe event_dist() should be create_event_dist()
• We have the DataSimEnrollment constructor for custom enrollment functions. These would still be used with set_enrollment(). I don't know if set_data_sim_enrollment() is friendlier?

• 100% for set_transformations
• create_event_dist sounds good. maybe specify_event_dist() and specify_baseline_vars()?
• I would vote for set_enrollment

[mattsecrest]

• [x] event dist --> create_event_dist()
• [ ] CRAN presubmit