Update to crops definition function to allow for "both"

[lilyclements]

We want to have the option to see the results with "Start Check" both TRUE and FALSE in the same table (as two columns)

This PR does this, so now start_check takes "yes", "no", and "both" as arguments.

start_check == "yes" works how start_check == TRUE used to work
start_check == "no" works how start_check == FALSE used to work
start_check == "both" gives results for start_check == TRUE and start_check == FALSE. This therefore gives two columns - instead of overall_cond, which is given for the above two options, this gives overall_cond_with_start and overall_cond_no_start.

This is for use in EPICSA where we want to have stored a whole set of summaries to be calculable from a saved file (i.e., the resulting "crops_def" file here)

This is linked to issue #9052. I suggest that whoever implements #9052 reads in these changes (this should not be merged without amendments made to the dialog because of the changes in start_check)

[Vitalis95]

@N-thony , could you please merge this PR, the updated function is needed in #9053

[N-thony]

@N-thony , could you please merge this PR, the updated function is needed in #9053

@Vitalis95 I have already approved, we can merge this once @rdstern approves too.

[lilyclements]

@N-thony @Vitalis95 merging this in would mean the crops probabilities dialog does not work until the appropriate changes are made in the dialog. I suggest this not merged into the master branch but instead @Vitalis95 take over this branch and make in it your changes to the dialog

[Vitalis95]

@lilyclements , I get the following error from this PR when importing data

[lilyclements]

@Vitalis95 that's a pretty major error! Thanks - should be fixed now, oops.

[rdstern]

@lilyclements and @Vitalis95 I am not sure if I am needed here? I think if @lilyclements and @N-thony approve, then this can be merged, though perhaps it is being incorporated elsewhere, and can then be closed?
I take the opportunity to note that perhaps my addition of the seq option in the dialog could help, if added when there are just 3 numbers in the control, and the third is smaller than the second. If so, then some examples are also needed in the pull-down.

[lilyclements]

@rdstern I did wonder about using the sequence ideas from the seq dialog. David didn't seem to jump onto that idea -- I think because we just want to offer the same "options" each time for our EPICSA users, but perhaps I am mistaken. It would be good for us to clarify that.

I am happy to close this once @Vitalis95 has merged into his own branch?

[Vitalis95]

@lilyclements , there is this error when you run the updated function

Here is the code;

data_book$crops_definitions(data_name="ghana", year="year", station="station", rain="rainfall", day="doy", plant_days=c(120), 
plant_lengths=c(120), rain_totals=c(600), start_day="start_rain", end_day="end_rains",
 season_data_name="ghana_by_station_year", start_check="yes")

[lilyclements]

@Vitalis95 thanks. this should be fixed now

[N-thony]

@Vitalis95 thanks. this should be fixed now

@Vitalis95 do you still need this PR?

[Vitalis95]

@N-thony , we no longer need this

[N-thony]

@N-thony , we no longer need this

can you close it?