Michael Lawrence

These ideas are meant to be useful beyond the context of argument assertions. For example, in documentation. Or, what the last sentence mentioned: an auto-generated "escape hatch" for lazy evaluation.

Luke has not yet made any changes to the `SEXP` header. Will let you know if there are any updates. I'm very excited about the potential.

Dynamically showing and hiding rows seems like it would be difficult to implement client side, particularly when clustering is involved.

I wonder though if the key-based linking defined by `crosstalk::highlight_key()` might provide a way to propagate events across multiple tables in a way that makes sense. We're exploring a project...

Since there are only three possible anchors (five for stranded), we could just enumerate: `mutate_with_fixed_start()`, `mutate_with_fixed_end()`. Another idea is kinda like `ascending()` in dplyr. Just cast the width assignment: ```...

Yea, good point. I think the preposition should be `to`, like `anchor_to_start()`. At least that's how we would say it in English.

Great. I agree with everything. I was just thinking today that the `join_` prefix works with auto-complete and thus makes things more discoverable. Across the API, we should make sure...

Are GroupedRanges just the result of `group_by()`? If so, I would do whatever dplyr does. I think the behavior is the same, grouped or ungrouped, since there is no aggregation.

I was just looking at these in preparation for the talk, and I'm a bit confused. Here is what I expected: `join_overlap_inner()`: the equivalent of current `join_overlap_left()` except it keeps...

Actually we should probably review GMQL: http://www.bioinformatics.deib.polimi.it/genomic_computing/GMQL/doc/GMQL_Complete_Documentation.pdf In section 3.4.3, they layout a full-featured genomic join language. Some observations: 1. Seems like we should support the naming of additional metadata...