search

ropensci-review-tools / pkgcheck

Check whether a package is ready for submission to rOpenSci's peer-review system
https://docs.ropensci.org/pkgcheck/
18 stars 6 forks source link

avoid checking internal functions #161

Closed dusadrian closed 2 years ago

dusadrian commented 2 years ago

Hi, I've just ran pkgcheck() on my package declared, and one of the problems is that internal functions are reported as not having "documented return values".

The trouble is, internal functions are by definition undocumented. If they were documented, they would not be internal.

In some situations, documenting is not even possible, for instance [ is a primitive base function for which I've added an S3 method [.declared. This is an internal function, that is registered in the Namespace, but it has no documentation of its own. The questions is, how could such functions have a "documented return value"?

Alternatively, is there a method to instruct pkgcheck() to ignore internal functions?

mpadge commented 2 years ago

That check indeed had a couple of bug, potentially including the behaviour you mention, but has since been updated. I ran checks locally on your package, and all was clear. Please re-install and ensure you've got version >= 0.1.0.21. Please close issue if that resolves your problem. Thanks

mpadge commented 2 years ago

(But by the way, internal functions can be documented, and doing so is recommended by rOpenSci, as it helps other understand your code. They should then just be appended with a ˋ@noRdˋ tag instead of ˋ@exportˋ - see Dev Guide for more details.)

dusadrian commented 2 years ago

Excellent, thank you very much @mpadge. The suggestion about @nord is very useful, I did not know about it (but will surely use it from now on).