Closed averissimo closed 1 year ago
@pawelru would you prefer to have your branch as the base?
Yes please do change the base.
I am aware that the tests are not so great atm but wanted to do this after all packages will be covered. This is much more important.
Rebased against training
branch and corrected the variable name problem you identified! Thanks
This was a low-effort sidequest that I won't continue for now
However, the tools/fixes here will allow for unit tests of some of the changes I've been adding
Motivation
I was thinking on a way to test some of the changes I've been making and realized that tests were outdated.
None of the tests were passing, I corrected them and simplified the code to remove repetitive lines that are difficult to support.
note: this PR is not included in the other one to avoid having 1 big PR.
Current status
Not all of the tests currently pass (pre or post-simplification), but it might be the
Remotes
bug you mentioned or something else that I need to correct.Regardless these tests should be correct.
Changes description
x$solve()
being used instead ofsolve_ip()
local_description()
helper{withr::local_*}
logic to create a temporary DESCRIPTION file and then remove from disktest_proposal_common()
helper@pawelru would you prefer to have your branch as the base?