hw06 ready for grading

[yidie]

last commit: 5d3b2b2

Note: Please download/clone and run/knit my code on your computer to do the peer review. Because str_view() output cannot be shown properly on Github. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks for your time! This issue was discussed on slack

[peterwhitman]

Nice job on homework 6! You tackled the "Character Data" and "Writing Functions" prompts adequately. I think I would have liked to see more comments throughout the assignment. These help the viewer understand your thought process and workflow. It also looks like the function that you developed is very similar to the example given in the prompt. It would have been cool if you explored functions a little bit more. You did however do a good job of structuring your assignment, especially the "Character Data" task. This was a long task, and you organized it really well.

Peter

[dorawyy]

Hi Yidie,

Glad to review your homework 06!

• Overal, you did a good job, and it's impressive that you chose task1, the Stringr one, which is the heaviest one;
• You also implemented task2 and you wrote your own function;
• You use sections, and subsections, which I found helpful when following;
• You included your reflection in the README of homework06, which is good.

Here are some suggestions:

• It would be very helpful if you could add some comments around the homework to help us more clearly understand your thought, and your workflow; For example, why you did those testcases in the first task;
• It would also be great if you could combine some kind of plot with your customized function.

Hope this helps. 😄

-Yingying

[derekcho]

Hi @yidie ! Here are some comments about your hw06:

• Task 1 was well done. For the first part, you did a good job showing the differences between str_c() and paste/paste0 and how they handle NA values and use separators. Your function for inserting commas was well done and efficient! Your testing with different strings was a good demonstration of how your function works. You attempted and completed most of the exercises.
• I think that you could have done more for the second task. It was very similar to the example with a replacement of rlm instead of lm. In addition, there wasn’t much explanation of the function and it did not incorporate any new elements we discussed in class such as error testing. I think that you could have included a more in-depth demonstration of your function rather than just showing one fit for one country. For example, find a country with outliers and compare how your robust linear regression function compares to a non-robust one (by comparing estimated coefficients and through a plot perhaps).
• You did a good job with the first task, however I think that the second task you have used a bit more substance too. The example serves as a starting point but you should be able to try to add to it or modify it with some of the things shown in class! If you are unsure of what is expected for a task, feel free to ask on slack or in office hours.

Note: your mark (check minus, check, check plus) will be distributed later.