[x] Many parts of the code use paste0 to construct file paths...R's file.path function is a more robust way to do this
[x] Most R style guides, including Google and Tidyverse, recommend using <- for assignment, not =
[x] Consider running the package through the styler package, with a style of your choice, to ensure clear and consistent code style
[x] rm(list = ls()) is not needed at the end of test blocks; testthat takes care of cleanup
[x] library calls should never appear in package code
[x] Since you're using Roxygen, use importFrom in function headers to make functions available (and eliminate all the dplyr::-type namespace qualifiers, too, improving readability)
[x] On my system, checking the package currently generates many NOTEs and WARNINGs: undocumented function arguments, non-ASCII strings, missing documentation, unrecognized documentation tags, undefined/no visible binding variables
[x] Package tests generate lots of printed outputs, which makes it hard to see test results
https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/5975
paste0to construct file paths...R's file.path function is a more robust way to do this<-for assignment, not=stylerpackage, with a style of your choice, to ensure clear and consistent code stylerm(list = ls())is not needed at the end of test blocks;testthattakes care of cleanuplibrarycalls should never appear in package codeimportFromin function headers to make functions available (and eliminate all thedplyr::-type namespace qualifiers, too, improving readability)