Package tests

[seabbs]

It can really help users trust a package if it has robust testing, external validation and code reports. There are some great R packages (as I am sure you are aware) like {testthat} for unit testing code and {vdiffr} for testing plots.

Running tests externally (i.e with travis as set up here) can be really nice + a code coverage report can then be generated.

Very happy to help get this set up and start adding some tests!

Linked to #6

[giabaio]

Again --- I do think that BCEA is fairly robust, as it's been continuously tested and developed for quite some time now (I did start while I was working on one of my papers, back in 2007/8!). BUT, no reason why we shouldn't move towards more advanced & modern methods, so again --- happy to discuss!

[seabbs]

I imagine it is! Do you have some unofficial testing framework in place? How do you currently check that changes don't introduce bugs/issues?

Unit testing is beneficial for development purposes (do new features break old features etc.) + shows that the package is following best practices and so can be quickly assessed for trustworthiness by users (not saying this is the only way but it is the standard).

Would you be happy for me to add the base testing and code coverage framework but a few outline tests? Adding full package tests may be a relatively big job and some tests will probably need your input as you know the package best.

If you were interested in a JOSS review (and passing community best practices etc) this would be required.

[giabaio]

I'm absolutely happy to move towards that and if you're willing to do so, happy for you to take the lead on the development version!

[n8thangreen]

closed e.g. bfe87f8