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

Add function to parse previous text log file #166

Merged
merged 29 commits into from
Sep 22, 2023

Conversation

parmsam-pfizer
Copy link
Collaborator

@parmsam-pfizer parmsam-pfizer commented Feb 21, 2023

Thank you for your Pull Request!

We have developed a Pull Request template to aid you and our reviewers. Completing the below tasks helps to ensure our reviewers can maximize their time on your code as well as making sure the logrx codebase remains robust and consistent.

The spirit of logrx

While many packages to facilitate the logging of code already exist in the R ecosystem, it is hard to find a solution that works well for clinical programming applications. Many logging implementations are more implicit and rely on user input to create the log for the execution of a script. While this is useful for logging specific events of an application, in clinical programming a log has a set purpose.

logrx is built around the concept of creating a log for the execution of an R script that provides an overview of what happened as well as the environment that it happened in. We set out to create a flexible logging utility that could provide the necessary information to anyone reviewing the code execution so they can recreate the execution environment and run the code for themselves. Please make sure your Pull Request meets this spirit of logrx.

Please check off each taskbox as an acknowledgment that you completed the task. This checklist is part of the Github Action workflows and the Pull Request will not be merged into the dev branch until you have checked off each task.

  • The spirit of logrx is met in your Pull Request
  • Check that your Pull Request is targeting the dev branch, Pull Requests to master should use the Release Pull Request Template
  • Code is formatted according to the tidyverse style guide
  • Updated relevant unit tests or have written new unit tests. Remember to remove any configured log objects at the end of every test using log_remove().
  • Creation/updates to relevant roxygen headers and examples.
  • Run devtools::document() so all .Rd files in the man folder and the NAMESPACE file in the project root are updated appropriately
  • Run pkgdown::build_site() and check that all affected examples are displayed correctly and that all new functions occur on the "Reference" page.
  • Update NEWS.md if the changes pertain to a user-facing function (i.e. it has an @export tag) or documentation aimed at users (rather than developers)
  • Address any updates needed for vignettes and/or templates
  • Run R CMD check locally and address all errors and warnings - devtools::check()
  • Link the issue so that it closes after successful merging.
  • Address all merge conflicts and resolve appropriately
  • Pat yourself on the back for a job well done! Much love to your accomplishment!

Adds `read_log_file() to read previous log object into list of tibbles object that you can more easily subset/filter. Addresses the first part of #162. Fixes #162.

@parmsam-pfizer parmsam-pfizer marked this pull request as ready for review March 1, 2023 22:12
@parmsam-pfizer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Looks like one of the ubuntu failed checks are haven related.

@parmsam-pfizer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Looks like the Ubuntu 3.6 image is also failing for this one now.

@bms63
Copy link
Collaborator

bms63 commented Sep 8, 2023

@parmsam-pfizer add yourself to the Description File!!

Copy link
Collaborator

@bms63 bms63 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was thinking more on the purpose of this update. We are trying to extract and parse the contents of the to do some sort of analysis.

read_log_file might be a bit misleading...what about extract_log_contents , parse_log_contents or something else??

@parmsam-pfizer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

parmsam-pfizer commented Sep 12, 2023

The function is based on the name scheme used in readr. Maybe we can discuss alternate names at our next meeting. I'll work on the other edits in the meantime.

@parmsam-pfizer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@nicholas-masel @bms63
Made changes based on our meeting earlier today. Please feel free to merge PR if it looks good. 🚀

Copy link
Collaborator

@bms63 bms63 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! @nicholas-masel or @kodesiba any last words?!?

@bms63 bms63 linked an issue Sep 22, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@bms63 bms63 merged commit c8e877e into pharmaverse:dev Sep 22, 2023
5 of 8 checks passed
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.

Feature Request: Add ability to easily subset/filter log files
2 participants