We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
API-wise I think it would make sense to add a estimate_contrasts() method to apply to estimate_slopes() outputs
estimate_contrasts()
estimate_slopes()
estimate_slopes(m) |> estimate_contrasts()
Instead of complexifying the estimate_slopes() itself
Originally posted by @DominiqueMakowski in #301 (comment)
Yes, we would still not recompute from scratch
I reckon a pipe workflow would just be syntactic sugar for:
estimate_contrasts.estimate_means <- function(x) { model <- extract_model(x) # recompute contrasts estimate_contrasts(model, ...) }
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Make functions pipe-friendly
afdd732
Fixes #304
strengejacke
Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.
API-wise I think it would make sense to add a
estimate_contrasts()
method to apply toestimate_slopes()
outputsestimate_slopes(m) |> estimate_contrasts()
Instead of complexifying the estimate_slopes() itself
Originally posted by @DominiqueMakowski in #301 (comment)
Yes, we would still not recompute from scratch
I reckon a pipe workflow would just be syntactic sugar for:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: