testthat

I have a function in a package I'm building that assigns a hex-code to the global environment for use by analysts... optiplum<-function(){ assign( x="optiplum", value=rgb(red=129,green=61,blue=114, maxColorValue = 255), envir=.GlobalEnv) } My unit test code is: test_that("optiplum - produces the correct hex code",{ optiplum() expect_true(identical(optiplum,"#813D72")) }) When I run the code manually, there isn't an error: > str(optiplum) chr "#813D72" > str("#813D72") chr "#813D72" > identical("#813D72",optiplum) [1] TRUE > expect_true(identical(optiplum,"#813D72")) When I run a test_file() is

Is there any way to reproduce the environment which is used by devtools::check ? I have the problem that my tests work with devtools::test() but fail within devtools::check() . My problem is now, how to find the problem. The report of check just prints the last few lines of the error log and I can't find the complete report for the testing. checking tests ... ERROR Running the tests in ‘tests/testthat.R’ failed. Last 13 lines of output: ... I know that check uses a different environment compared to test but I don't know how I should debug these problems since they are not reproducible at all.

I am building a package which works with data.table and which should be tested using package testthat. While the code works fine when calling from the command line, I run into issues when calling from a test case. It seems that the [] function from the base package, i.e. the function for data.frames is used when running the tests. I have created a minimum example which can be found here: https://github.com/utalo/test_datatable_testthat The package contains a single function: test <- function() { dt <- data.table(MESSAGE="Test 1234567890",TYPE="ERROR") dt[,.(MESSAGE=strwrap(MESSAGE,width = 10))

I have a bunch of tests that I don't want them running during CRAN checks or Travis CI builds. They are either long-running, or they could cause transaction/concurrency conflicts writing to a networked database. What approach of separating them (from the R CMD check tests) works best with testthat ? Should I put those tests in a separate folder? Should I tag their filename and use a regex? (eg Using filter argument in test_package to skip tests by @Jeroen) http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/policies.html : Long-running tests and vignette code can be made optional for checking, but do

I have a lot of functions that generate plots, typically with ggplot2. Right now, I'm generating the plot and testing the underlying data. But I'd like to know if there's a reasonable way to test that the plot contains the layers/options I expect it to or that graphical elements match expectations. For example: library(ggplot2) library(scales) # for percent() library(testthat) df <- data.frame( Response = LETTERS[1:5], Proportion = c(0.1,0.2,0.1,0.2,0.4) ) #' @export plot_fun plot_fun <- function(df) { p1 <- ggplot(df, aes(Response, Proportion)) + geom_bar(stat='identity') + scale_y_continuous

I am using Hadley's testthat-based approach for automated testing of my package. With this approach, what is the most suitable place to put test data files that is files only used by the test scripts in tests/testthat), but not by any other functions in R/? My current approach is to put them in tests/testdata , and then read.table from there with a relative path rather than with system.file (in order to avoid the need to install the package to run tests). Is there a standard way to do this? Lifting from Ben Bolker's comments: I use inst/testdata and then system.file("testdata",...,package="my