Code Coverage Summary

Filename                 Stmts    Miss  Cover    Missing
---------------------  -------  ------  -------  -----------
R/betadiff.R                59       0  100.00%
R/boundsPostprob.R          44       0  100.00%
R/boundsPredprob.R          56       1  98.21%   83
R/dbetabinom.R              81       3  96.30%   32, 62, 136
R/oc2.R                    162     162  0.00%    93-326
R/oc3.R                    146     146  0.00%    91-308
R/ocPostprob.R             117       0  100.00%
R/ocPostprobDist.R         122       0  100.00%
R/ocPredprob.R             205       0  100.00%
R/ocPredprobDist.R         257       5  98.05%   363-367
R/ocRctPostprobDist.R      166       0  100.00%
R/ocRctPredprobDist.R      302       0  100.00%
R/plotBeta.R                71       5  92.96%   115-119
R/plotBounds.R              52      52  0.00%    33-90
R/plotDecision.R            79      79  0.00%    16-136
R/plotOc.R                  52       2  96.15%   96-97
R/postprob.R                34       1  97.06%   106
R/postprobDist.R            77       1  98.70%   204
R/predprob.R                24       0  100.00%
R/predprobDist.R           140       1  99.29%   269
R/runShinyPhase1b.R          4       4  0.00%    8-13
R/sumbetadiff.R             63      63  0.00%    24-101
R/sumTable.R                20      20  0.00%    25-48
TOTAL                     2333     545  76.64%

Diff against main

Filename                 Stmts    Miss  Cover
---------------------  -------  ------  -------
R/ocPostprob.R               0      -6  +5.13%
R/ocPredprob.R               0      -6  +2.93%
R/ocRctPostprobDist.R        0      -6  +3.61%
R/ocRctPredprobDist.R        0     -60  +19.87%
R/plotOc.R                 +31     -19  +96.15%
TOTAL                      +31     -97  +4.53%

Results for commit: 8be9695

Minimum allowed coverage is 80%

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results

Unit Tests Summary

    1 files     17 suites   7m 4s ⏱️
  129 tests   128 ✅ 1 💤 0 ❌
1 288 runs  1 285 ✅ 3 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit 8be9695.

Unit Test Performance Difference

Results for commit a448ba4

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

Thanks @audreyyeoCH , I think there are two good options:

1. first fix the main branch with a separate PR, but only really have the few changes needed to fix the notes on main branch. That means branching off freshly off main for the fix branch and doing those notes fixes.

Or alternative:
2) first merge the other PR where we discovered the notes (just fixing the warning in that same PR), and then afterwards proceed with 1)

In principle you could also fix those notes directly in the other PR. I just thought I don't want to block the other PR for that.

But I would not do the fix branching off the old feature branch needed for the other PR. Because then we have too many other changes and commits included so it is hard to review.

Makes sense?

Thanks @audreyyeoCH , I think there are two good options:

1. first fix the main branch with a separate PR, but only really have the few changes needed to fix the notes on main branch. That means branching off freshly off main for the fix branch and doing those notes fixes.

Or alternative: 2) first merge the other PR where we discovered the notes (just fixing the warning in that same PR), and then afterwards proceed with 1)

In principle you could also fix those notes directly in the other PR. I just thought I don't want to block the other PR for that.

But I would not do the fix branching off the old feature branch needed for the other PR. Because then we have too many other changes and commits included so it is hard to review.

Makes sense?

Thanks @danielinteractive I think I'll go with 2. and fix those notes directly in the other PR. Would it be ok to update the design there too ?

I realise now that I made a misstep to create this is a branch off 99 now ...didnt know that was what happened

sounds good, yes, can then all go in that other PR and this can be closed