Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove pp_check() alias #706

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Mar 30, 2024
Merged

Remove pp_check() alias #706

merged 14 commits into from
Mar 30, 2024

Conversation

strengejacke
Copy link
Member

Fixes #477

@@ -161,10 +161,37 @@ check_predictions.stanreg <- function(object,
)

if (inherits(object, "brmsfit")) {
out <- bayesplot::pp_check(object, type = type, ndraws = iterations, ...)
out <- as.data.frame(bayesplot::pp_check(object, type = type, ndraws = iterations, ...))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

do we even need to call bayesplot? Couldn't we directly compute predictions like in #202 (comment)

though it might be less efficient

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure how we can get dot-plots for discrete/integer outcomes?

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 29, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 16.98113% with 44 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 59.83%. Comparing base (846e7cd) to head (dfe08aa).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
R/check_predictions.R 16.98% 44 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #706      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   60.22%   59.83%   -0.39%     
==========================================
  Files          86       86              
  Lines        6283     6322      +39     
==========================================
- Hits         3784     3783       -1     
- Misses       2499     2539      +40     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@bwiernik
Copy link
Contributor

Why do we want to remove the aliases? I thought we had resolved the conflicts with pp_check(), and think there is value in exporting methods for that generic?

@strengejacke
Copy link
Member Author

We don't want to remove pp_check(), only posterior_predictive_check() and check_posterior_predictions().

@strengejacke strengejacke merged commit 2e718b8 into main Mar 30, 2024
22 of 26 checks passed
@strengejacke strengejacke deleted the strengejacke/issue477 branch March 30, 2024 10:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Remove pp_check() alias
3 participants