Zebulun Arendsee

I think I fixed the argument passing issue. But there is still the question of whether there should be special handling of ambiguous nodes.

No worries, have a nice flight!

Yeah, there is just the matter of whether we want to be able to handle ambiguous nodes and ambiguous species differently.

@sckott Nothing particularly new. `taxizedb` can distinguish ambiguous nodes and ambiguous species, e.g. ```R taxizedb::downstream(3700, downto='genus', ambiguous_nodes=FALSE, ambiguous_species=TRUE) ``` Adding the same arguments to `taxize` might be good. Although I...

@sckott Hmm, nothing about the request seems off to me. Some of the missing phyla are fairly new, see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27287844. I wonder if there is some something screwy on the...

`funnel` is working *on* the monad, not *in* the monad. So the `%>>%` operator should probably not be used (except in exotic cases). I could add a warning if the...

This is definitely a bug. `rmonad` should pass values in exactly the same way as `magrittr`. The guts of rmonad are a wretched mess right now. They evolved haphazardly as...

Then perhaps either an error should be raised or the comments should be entirely ignored. Single field comments, like `[&label=1]` *do* work in the Newick inputs. So there is partial...

Good point. I'll try to add this in the next release, probably in a couple weeks.

I haven't forgotten this. I'll try to add when I get around to starting a UI-centered dev-cycle.