[R-pkg-devel] [External] Re: toy example for testing purpose

Hi Dr Ligges and team,

Thanks for the explanation. it makes sense to me now!
I am working on putting examples in testthat folder, hope it?s the right 
way to do it.

/Joan Zhang, MS/
Research Informatics Analyst

Larsen Lab - Emory Transplant Center

*From: *Uwe Ligges <ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
*Date: *Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 10:46 AM
*To: *Zhang, Xueqiong <joan.zhang at emory.edu>, 
r-package-devel at r-project.org <r-package-devel at r-project.org>
*Subject: *[External] Re: toy example for testing purpose



On 16.08.2022 20:28, Zhang, Xueqiong wrote:

 > Hi all,
 >
 >? ? I got this comment from our CRAN package reviewer ( blue content
 > below) , but I am not sure how to fix it ?
 >
 >? ?If I put @example in source .R with \donttest then I lose the example
 > run; if without \donttest then the CPU time will exceed 5 sec. ?I
 > already do have examples in vignettes. ?Do I need add test calls in
 > other place/script?

Well, ideally you have short examples so that users see quickly how your
function can be called. Ideally examples take less than 5 sec., becuase
users are typically not very patient when runningn exmaples from help pages.

If your examples are lengthy we ask you to put them in \donttest{} but
try to provide short ones in addition to the lengthy ones (rather
provide some tiny toy data, use few iterations etc)

If all ends up in \donttest{}, no vignette runtime code and no tests,
your packages won't have any code executed at runtime which is of course
a vey bad idea. SAo we ask to provide tests in case you do not provide
examples that get auto-executed during the checks.
In vignettes we typically see a workflow tested, but not all
functionality of the package, and frequently only subseta of provided
functions get executed in vignettes...

Best,
Uwe Ligges

 > Thanks,
 >
 > Joan
 >
 > /
 > />>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 >
 >
 >
 > Putting the lengthy examples in \donttest is correct. However, it would
 > be great if you either could write shorter toy examples or if not
 > possible at least write some test so that we can check the functionality
 > of your functions.
 >