Should any_is_na_linter() be extended to cover sum(is.na(x)) != 0L?

[IndrajeetPatil]

It doesn't seem that uncommon of a pattern to find NAs.

library(lintr)

x <- rep(c(TRUE, NA, FALSE, FALSE), 1000)

identical(
  sum(is.na(x)) != 0L, 
  anyNA(x)
)
#> [1] TRUE

# currently doesn't lint
lint(
  text = "sum(is.na(x)) != 0L",
  linters = any_is_na_linter()
)

^{Created on 2022-09-30 with reprex v2.0.2}

[MichaelChirico]

I would put this is under our BooleanArithmeticLinter, which covers other logical aggregations passed to sun() instead of any/all

…

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 5:42 AM Indrajeet Patil ***@***.***> wrote: It doesn't seem that uncommon <https://github.com/search?q=%22sum%28is.na%22&type=code> of a pattern to find NAs. library(lintr) x <- rep(c(TRUE, NA, FALSE, FALSE), 1000) identical( sum(is.na(x)) != 0L, anyNA(x) )#> [1] TRUE # currently doesn't lint lint( text = "sum(is.na(x)) != 0L", linters = any_is_na_linter() ) Created on 2022-09-30 with reprex v2.0.2 <https://reprex.tidyverse.org> — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1575>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB2BA5P74LSBP5EOIY5VZLLWA3NZ3ANCNFSM6AAAAAAQZXWK7M> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[IndrajeetPatil]

I don't see BooleanArithmeticLinter in #884, but maybe it's not included there.

Sounds good to me.

[MichaelChirico]

I haven't been updating the list in #884 but we have developed a few more in the meantime 😅

…

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 10:53 AM Indrajeet Patil ***@***.***> wrote: I don't see BooleanArithmeticLinter in #884 <#884>, but maybe it's not included there. Sounds good to me. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1575 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB2BA5OIIZZH5BSKHL7B6ODWA4SIHANCNFSM6AAAAAAQZXWK7M> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[IndrajeetPatil]

So exciting!

[MichaelChirico]

Subsuming this under #1580