Practical series 3 feedback

[richardreeve]

Hi @SBOHVM/rpir22 - you should all have feedback in your GitHub repos on practical series 3 now - please ask if you have any questions or concerns. As before, I don't guarantee by any means that I identified every issue, but hopefully it will be useful to see what I'm looking for and some of the things I've picked up on.

As a general observation, don't forget that as well as producing a package with functions and demos, I'm looking for documentation for the functions and the package - some people copied some documentation across from function to function without adapting it, and never edited the default text for the package documentation. Also, I want to be able to generate a report / notebook from your demos, so please make sure you can do that - adding in extra text blocks close figures in reports so something that runs as a demo can fail to compile as a report.

One further thing that a few people got wrong was adding header information to the functions in the R folder - if you do that you will mess up the help formatting (something like ?timestep_deterministic_SIR will look wrong) - and a few of you conversely failed to add header information to the demos, so when I created a report from them it looked less well formatted, so do check you did that. And don't forget to run devtools::document() after you've edited the documentation or added a new function (and @exported it) to make sure it is picked up by the package.

And note that all of this applies at least as much to the project submissions as to the Series 3 submissions, which is worth much fewer marks.