Open glennmoy opened 8 months ago
One of the unusual things about this package's API is that the functions one extends to generate rows aren't really intended to be called by the user. For example, you're expected to define a new method for visit!
, but realistically there's no situation in which you'd actually call visit!
, you only take advantage of the fact that the method you defined allows you to call generate
.
One of the unusual things about this package's API is that the functions one extends to generate rows aren't really intended to be called by the user. For example, you're expected to define a new method for
visit!
, but realistically there's no situation in which you'd actually callvisit!
, you only take advantage of the fact that the method you defined allows you to callgenerate
.
yeah totally understand, and I think for that reason generate
should be exported and documented as part of the public API which users call vs the private methods they should extend if they want to support new generator types.
We may want to consider exporting generate
under the name generate_rows
in order to differentiate it from generate_tables
, which we should also export, and also because generate_rows
is strictly more descriptive of what the function actually generates.
Besides
TableGenerator
it's not clear which functions are public vs private API. Empirically, one would thinkgenerate
is the only public-facing function but it's not documented one way or the other.