1040 rtables round type

[iaugusty]

this PR is linked to rtables issue insightsengineering/rtables#1040

[github-actions]

✅ All contributors have signed the CLA
_{Posted by the CLA Assistant Lite bot.}

[iaugusty]

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA

[iaugusty]

@shajoezhu This PR depends on formatters pull request insightsengineering/formatters#366.
How to get the github actions to use the proper formatters version?

[github-actions]

Code Coverage Summary

Filename                 Stmts    Miss  Cover    Missing
---------------------  -------  ------  -------  ----------------------------------------------------------
R/paginate_listing.R        29       0  100.00%
R/rlistings_methods.R      140      17  87.86%   40-41, 43, 73, 92, 96, 196-199, 202, 286-292
R/rlistings.R              367      25  93.19%   237-244, 370, 379, 460, 644-647, 651-654, 683-684, 725-728
TOTAL                      536      42  92.16%

Diff against main

Filename                 Stmts    Miss  Cover
---------------------  -------  ------  -------
R/rlistings_methods.R       +4       0  +0.36%
R/rlistings.R               +2       0  +0.04%
TOTAL                       +6       0  +0.09%

Results for commit: c7ad19e

Minimum allowed coverage is 80%

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results

[github-actions]

Unit Tests Summary

  1 files    5 suites   9s ⏱️
 51 tests  45 ✅  6 💤 0 ❌
176 runs  156 ✅ 20 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit c7ad19e.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Unit Test Performance Difference

Test Suite	$Status$	Time on main	$±Time$	$±Tests$	$±Skipped$	$±Failures$	$±Errors$
paginate_listing	💚	$7.15$	$-2.83$	$0$	$0$	$0$	$0$

Additional test case details

Test Suite	$Status$	Time on main	$±Time$	Test Case
listings	👶		$+0.08$	round_type_approach_works
listings	👶		$+0.08$	round_type_getter_and_setter_on_list_of_listing_df

Results for commit 5f46d28

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[shajoezhu]

awesome! this is working thanks! see insightsengineering/scda.test#201

[shajoezhu]

downstream all good! insightsengineering/scda.test#201 thanks guys!

[gmbecker]

Looks good some small notes/needed tests

[iaugusty]

@gmbecker all review comments addressed as per discussion

[shajoezhu]

hi @gmbecker , can you fix the lintr issue please. thanks!

[gmbecker]

Ugh, so apparently we do need to use %>% in at least one place, because we're using . somewhere. So the linter was just wrong. Will push reversion but since when does the superlinter complain about this @shajoezhu?