Add potential sequence() lints to seq_linter()

[Bisaloo]

Fix #2595

[MichaelChirico]

The lint now only covers unlist(lapply(x, seq_len)).

What about

• unlist(lapply(x, seq))
• unlist(lapply(x, seq, by = 2)), and other variants equivalent to using the from= and/or by= arguments of sequence()?
• I don't think it's worth trying to find examples like lapply(x, \(xi) seq(xi)) which would be covered by unnecessary_lambda_linter(). But are there any examples that do require looking into a lambda to replicate a sequence()-able call?

(it would be nice to get a sense of how many hits these are getting before investing too much time -- and also feel free to earmark some of this as a TODO in a follow-up issue, though lapply(x,seq) is trivial enough to be done here)

[Bisaloo]

unlist(lapply(x, seq, by = 2)), and other variants equivalent to using the from= and/or by= arguments of sequence()?

I don't think there is a direct equivalence:

• from has a different behaviour in seq() and sequence()

  unlist(lapply(1:5, seq, from = 2))
  #>  [1] 2 1 2 2 3 2 3 4 2 3 4 5
  
  sequence(1:5, from = 2)
  #>  [1] 2 2 3 2 3 4 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 6

  ^{Created on 2024-06-22 with reprex v2.1.0}

• As far as I can tell, by= cannot be used on its own without from=, which brings us back to the previous case

  seq(20, by = 2)
  #> Error in seq.default(20, by = 2): wrong sign in 'by' argument

  ^{Created on 2024-06-22 with reprex v2.1.0}

I have edited the xpath to make sure this type of call doesn't lint.

[MichaelChirico]

From ?sequence, I think there is another case, I just don't know if we'll ever see it in the wild :)

unlist(mapply(\(nvec, from, by) seq(from, by=by, length.out=nvec), nvces, froms, bys))

There are a few possibilities here, anyway I don't think we need to include those yet:

https://github.com/search?q=lang%3AR+%2Funlist%5B%28%5D%5B+%5Cn%5D*map%2F+%2Fseq%5B%28%5D%2F&type=code

More worthy of consideration is unlist(lapply(i, "seq")), but again can be done later.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.64%. Comparing base (500a38c) to head (57fac7a).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2618   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.63%   99.64%           
=======================================
  Files         126      126           
  Lines        6936     6953   +17     
=======================================
+ Hits         6911     6928   +17     
  Misses         25       25           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[IndrajeetPatil]

Let's also wait for MC's approval.

@MichaelChirico Can we add @Bisaloo to the repo as a contributor? Of course, only if he wishes to. 😅

[MichaelChirico]

@MichaelChirico Can we add @Bisaloo to the repo as a contributor? Of course, only if he wishes to. 😅

Invited!

[MichaelChirico]

ignoring failed check, it's a container timeout & unlikely to fail when the others have passed