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

Tighter test now that all.equal.data.table dispatches to nanoduration's all.equal() method #18

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 16, 2024

Conversation

MichaelChirico
Copy link
Contributor

Closes #17

We could also loosen the tolerance but a 1-second difference looks meaningful to me. Is the code WAI?

@eddelbuettel
Copy link
Owner

That looks fine at a glance.

And I presume you can ensure that the modified version is happy with the upcoming data.table release too?

@MichaelChirico
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yep, this PR was developed with dev installed. You did remind me to check & be sure this also passes with CRAN data.table in case you wanted to release early -- confirmed.

@eddelbuettel
Copy link
Owner

Can I ask you to quickly add a ChangeLog entry too? Same format as eg for your RProtoBuf changes here (with of course an email of your chosing, at work or home or ...)

@eddelbuettel eddelbuettel merged commit 4ba68f8 into eddelbuettel:master Jul 16, 2024
1 check passed
@eddelbuettel
Copy link
Owner

Actually, this reminds me that I had promised @kalibera an update at CRAN as his (earlier) PR is needed there too. I shall look into this.

(But not before CRAN gets back to me re Rcpp. Now been waiting 128.6 hours per my ciw::ciw().)

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.

data.table update to do "correct" column dispatch in all.equal() breaks dtts
2 participants