3 ms·
Without experiencing base R, you won't appreciate the tidyverse packages, which tend to have more of a learning curve. For example, you can just run boxplot(x)
by vobios 10y ago
Without experiencing base R, you won't appreciate the tidyverse packages, which tend to have more of a learning curve.
For example, you can just run boxplot(x) in base R and it will make you a plot. Only after trying to make any modifications to it that you will see the benefit ggplot2.
As you mention yourself, "I almost quit R completely in frustration". I believe that is exactly why you appreciate the other packages you mention.
- hatmatrix 10y agoFunny you mention this as an example. I find ggplot2 good for exploratory analysis on a data frame with many categorical variables that can be used for faceting/conditioning or grouping. When trying to make any modifications to its appearance, I usually return to base graphics.
- haddr 10y agoSame here. ggplot is nice, but whenever I need to do something more complex i suddenly find myself on stackoverflow. Base graph is super easy and usually get things done, even lattice is somehow more intuitive. ggplot when comes to details, seems awkward to me.
- mastratton3 10y agoAgreed, I almost use base r exclusively during exploratory work and move to ggplot only when I want to present a finding... I guess you could say its in-efficient but it seems to work.