Davis Vaughan

My plan for `cran-comments.md` going forward was going to be: - Mention how many broke. Tell CRAN we have sent PRs with at least 2 weeks notice. - Link them...

Here is what we are doing in `cran-comments.md` for tidyr 1.3.0 https://github.com/tidyverse/tidyr/blob/69b74ef967b6170fe2346c71236996f0a8e6347f/cran-comments.md

We should probably provide a definition for the new `mtfrm()` S3 generic if we can, used by `match()` and therefore `%in%`. In the meantime you can use `vctrs::vec_in()` instead

Not urgent for this release, just something I noticed I felt like ideally it would be almost as fast as `get0()`, it just seems like a shame for the checkers...

I think it would be reasonable to introduce `names_transform` to the `separate_wider_*()` family, like we have for `pivot_longer()` (it is a more precise version of `convert`)

I think this may actually be a base R bug. I believe that all data.frames should have a `names` attribute. If there are 0 columns then it should be set...

We do allow this though: ``` r unclass(dplyr::join_by("a" == "a")) #> $exprs #> $exprs[[1]] #> "a" == "a" #> #> #> $condition #> [1] "==" #> #> $filter #> [1]...

> if I have stored the column names in a vector The old method is not going away, so if you have this case then I'd recommend just supplying the...

> What are the semantics of dplyr::join_by("a" == "a") ? Shouldn't the result be identical to dplyr::join_by(a == a) ? They are identical yes

An alternative that might also work for us is for us to implement our own `df_select(x, cols)` in a low level package that can be used for column selection and...