3 ms·
Whether Julia replaces R has more to do with how R evolves over the next 5 years than Julia IMO. As far as "production use" I think that depends on whether what
by grayclhn 11y ago
Whether Julia replaces R has more to do with how R evolves over the next 5 years than Julia IMO. As far as "production use" I think that depends on whether what you're doing is well served by the existing libraries or not.
- tmalsburg2 11y agoR as a language is not evolving at all and that is not a problem because the strength of the R system is its incredibly rich ecosystem. Julia cannot evolve a similar ecosystem as long as it doesn't provide stable foundations and for this reason it is completely uninteresting for most of the audience despite its superior design.
- grayclhn 11y agoYes and no; base R is extremely stable, but if you need to install dplyr, maggrittr, ggplot2, Rcpp and knitr/rmarkdown to reproduce a large fraction of the work that's been done in the last few years that seems somewhat equivalent to language evolution. But with rough edges, because some of the nice workflows that this opens up (say piping) are not necessarily in line with the way R wants to deal with objects. In my experience, Julia is uninteresting to most statisticians because of the lack of mature libraries and because R is already good enough for most of the stuff they want to do. I don't think that relatively small language changes like the one discussed in the original issue are even on their radar, and I doubt that these changes are driving away people that would otherwise be maintaining packages.