add infer verbs? about generics HOT 8 CLOSED

I'll change and do a PR. Thanks!

from generics.

I think this makes a lot of sense. I’m not exactly sure how others would use the verbs individually instead of in the {infer} pipeline though too, but I’m likely overlooking some use cases.

from generics.

I don't think new functions should live here; this is specifically for base functions (or functions used by many existing packages) that should be generic. I think these functions would be a better fit for modelgenerics.

from generics.

I was assuming this repo and modelgenerics were the same thing based on the reroute. I'm not familiar with modelgenerics but agree with Hadley that these verbs aren't particularly useful unless some kind of modeling or testing is being done.

from generics.

@ismayc we're probably going to send this to CRAN this week. Do you have any issues if I add those verbs? I don't see much downside.

from generics.

Nope. That works for us.

from generics.

@ismayc Can you take a look at the new branch?

I kept the signatures the same (mostly x). Visualize uses data. If (or when) you make these methods in infer, would you consider changing that to x too?

from generics.

@topepo Looks good to me. We should probably switch to x. I’ll add that to the to-do list.

from generics.