Closes #10 add function create_iso8601()

[ramiromagno]

Thank you for your Pull Request! We have developed this task checklist from the
Development Process
Guide
to help with the final steps of the process. Completing the below tasks helps to
ensure our reviewers can maximize their time on your code as well as making sure
the oak codebase remains robust and consistent.

Please check off each taskbox as an acknowledgment that you completed the task
or check off that it is not relevant to your Pull Request. This checklist is
part of the Github Action workflows and the Pull Request will not be merged into
the devel branch until you have checked off each task.

• Place Closes #<insert_issue_number> into the beginning of your Pull z
  Request Title (Use Edit button in top-right if you need to update)
• Code is formatted according to the
  tidyverse style guide. Run
  styler::style_file() to style R and Rmd files
• Updated relevant unit tests or have written new unit tests, which should
  consider realistic data scenarios and edge cases, e.g. empty datasets, errors,
  boundary cases etc. - See
  Unit Test Guide
• Run devtools::document() so all .Rd files in the man folder and the
  NAMESPACE file in the project root are updated appropriately
• Address any updates needed for vignettes and/or templates
• Update NEWS.md if the changes pertain to a user-facing function (i.e. it
  has an @export tag) or documentation aimed at users (rather than developers)
• Build oak site pkgdown::build_site() and check that all affected
  examples are displayed correctly and that all new functions occur on the "Reference" page.
• Address or fix all lintr warnings and errors - lintr::lint_package()
• Run R CMD check locally and address all errors and warnings - devtools::check()

There is this NOTE:

❯ checking package subdirectories ... NOTE
  Problems with news in ‘NEWS.md’:
  No news entries found.

• Link the issue in the Development Section on the right hand side.
• Address all merge conflicts and resolve appropriately

[github-actions]

Package	Line Rate	Health
sdtm.oak	88%	✔
Summary	88% (241 / 273)	✔

[edgar-manukyan]

Thanks so much @ramiromagno, this is a great job 💠 💠 💠
So far I only had a chance to look at create_iso8601() and run the Roche tests. I added my comments along the lines.

I also did a time check with 310K records and it was slightly faster than the function we have in Roche. I run both on the same machine:

# 310K records

# sdtm.oak::create_iso8601()
# user  system elapsed 
# 7.20    0.34    8.58

# roak::calc_iso_date_time()
# user  system elapsed 
# 7.51    0.79    9.22 

To be fair, the above estimate was based on when I supplied all the known formats dtc_formats$fmt. If I supply only one format then sdtm.oak is the champion 🚀:

   user  system elapsed 
   2.43    0.18    2.76 

I will continue reviewing the internal functions 👍

[edgar-manukyan]

@ramiromagno, thanks so much for addressing Adam's and my comments 🙏

Everything looks awesome! I know that after the second approval you can merge, just wanted to make sure that at least one of our subject matter experts had a chance to try this awesomeness out. @rammprasad, will you have time?

[rammprasad]

Yes, I am reviewing it today. Lets merge it tomorrow.

[ramiromagno]

Thank you so much for your feedback so far. I think we can still improve quite a bit the article about the create_iso8601() function and add more units tests to get a good coverage. But perhaps getting some user feedback already would be useful too. Note that, as @rammprasad had suggested in one of our meetings, I changed the default value of .check_format from TRUE to FALSE.

[rammprasad]

Great work, @ramiromagno . it is actually mindblowing. I have added some comments. Please take a look.

[ramiromagno]

Hello @rammprasad: Just to be sure, I am only waiting for this pull request to be reviewed by you and then merged before I tackle these other two issues: #28 and #29. Is that okay?

[rammprasad]

Thank you, @ramiromagno, for merging this to the main. We can work on other issues (maybe #18 ) before #28 and #29

[ramiromagno]

Hi @rammprasad : I was not the one to perform the merging :) It was Adam. But I am happy to address those three issues :)