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

change name of differentialAbundance method #22

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 30, 2024
Merged

Conversation

d-callan
Copy link
Contributor

we have two differentialAbundance methods across our R ecosystem. theres one here, and one in MicrobiomeDB. this one is used by the site, and internally by the one in MicrobiomeDB. since the other is the one user-facing, im renaming this one. that should help clarify their relationship, but also make it easier for people looking through the docs to know what they need to look at to perform a diff abund analysis.

Copy link
Contributor

@asizemore asizemore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes look good.

Question. This isn't our only example of having an internal version and a user-facing version (thinking about correlation here), and probably there will be more. Would you be happy with this naming pattern of "internal..." continuing?

Another question, are you concerned with anyone using microbiomeComputations straight, without MicrobiomeDB? Or is it too tied to MicrobiomeDB to really use by itself anymore (outside of our eda world)

@d-callan
Copy link
Contributor Author

if a person wanted to use it directly, they could obviously, but i dont see a reason to cater to them. i think the docs should be clear as possible so people who go snooping can figure out whats going on, but thats about as far as i think we need to go. as for naming, i can be ok w it under the right circumstances. id like to avoid it as much as possible, but not to the point of bending ourselves or our docs into uncomfortable shapes. correlation i think is maybe a bit different, bc the api is consistent enough there that they can all reasonably use the same generic and so docs make more sense.

@d-callan d-callan merged commit 71f85f7 into master Apr 30, 2024
4 of 6 checks passed
@d-callan d-callan deleted the internal-diff-abund branch April 30, 2024 19:38
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.

2 participants