Potential typo? (#897)

I don't know if it was meant to be this way, because it's actually not weird to say `data time` but assuming it was meant to be `date time` I amended:

regular data time `lubridate::as_date_time()` -> regular date time `lubridate::as_date_time()`
This commit is contained in:
Vebash Naidoo 2021-02-08 18:31:26 +02:00 committed by GitHub
parent 9d6ed46c5e
commit 46c395a954
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions

View File

@ -636,7 +636,7 @@ typeof(y)
attributes(y)
```
POSIXlts are rare inside the tidyverse. They do crop up in base R, because they are needed to extract specific components of a date, like the year or month. Since lubridate provides helpers for you to do this instead, you don't need them. POSIXct's are always easier to work with, so if you find you have a POSIXlt, you should always convert it to a regular data time `lubridate::as_date_time()`.
POSIXlts are rare inside the tidyverse. They do crop up in base R, because they are needed to extract specific components of a date, like the year or month. Since lubridate provides helpers for you to do this instead, you don't need them. POSIXct's are always easier to work with, so if you find you have a POSIXlt, you should always convert it to a regular date time `lubridate::as_date_time()`.
### Tibbles