We had a bit of a back-and-forth in #820. The question was whether to keep customise_metric() or to officially replace ith with purrr::partial(). This PR adds a comment to the docs that customise_metric() is essentially the same as purrr::partial(). Also opening up the floor if people have more thoughts on it :)
@sbfnk
Checklist
[x] My PR is based on a package issue and I have explicitly linked it.
[x] I have included the target issue or issues in the PR title as follows: issue-number: PR title
[x] I have tested my changes locally.
[x] I have added or updated unit tests where necessary.
[x] I have updated the documentation if required.
[x] I have built the package locally and run rebuilt docs using roxygen2.
[x] My code follows the established coding standards and I have run lintr::lint_package() to check for style issues introduced by my changes.
[x] I have added a news item linked to this PR.
[ ] I have reviewed CI checks for this PR and addressed them as far as I am able.
Description
This PR closes #820.
We had a bit of a back-and-forth in #820. The question was whether to keep
customise_metric()or to officially replace ith withpurrr::partial(). This PR adds a comment to the docs thatcustomise_metric()is essentially the same aspurrr::partial(). Also opening up the floor if people have more thoughts on it :) @sbfnkChecklist
lintr::lint_package()to check for style issues introduced by my changes.