5 ms·

There are a bunch of odd non-standard syntax choices in this tutorial. For example, the author ends statements with semicolons. R does allow equal sign assignme

There are a bunch of odd non-standard syntax choices in this tutorial. For example, the author ends statements with semicolons. R does allow equal sign assignment (although style guides prefer the stupid arrow syntax). The author mentions Bioconductorm the... second biggest package repository for the language? I clicked because I was a programmer for 15 years before I used R, and I have subsequently developed and shipped R packages, so I feel like I'm in a pretty good position to get the visceral, cathartic, "argh" the writer here was going for.

rossdavidh 8y ago
the "stupid arrow syntax" is not nearly so stupid, and I speak here as a 10+ year Python developer, as the misuse of the equal sign that every C-style language seems to think is ok. The = sign meant something long before computer programming, and it is something the developer community ought to be ashamed of that it is being used for "change this thing to that". /rant
- peatmoss 8y ago
  R was originally not much more than a bunch of Scheme macros if I understand the history right. Suspect <- may have just been an infix macro for define at one point. Of course I probably would have preferred just keeping the lispy syntax of scheme without all the infix stuff!
- YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
  Well, the "=" operator is eas to type since it's on pretty much every keyboard and probably has been for ever. And it's faster than typing a two-symbol operator like := or <- so. If you want "=" to (more or less) mean what it used to mean "long before computer programming", try Prolog. ?- a = a. true. ?- a = b. false. ?- A = a. A = a. ?- A = a, A = b. false. ?- A = a, A = B. A = B, B = a. ?- A == B. false. ?- A = B, A == B. A = B. Nice? Most programmers would pull their hair from the root at all this :) (hint: "=" is not assignment, neither is it equality and "==" is just a stricter version thereof).
- jejones3141 8y ago
  I would willingly put up with the stupid arrow syntax if I could use ← for it, and with the gratuitously confusing to people coming from other languages use of [[ ]] for an element of a list rather than a sublist if I could use ⟦ ⟧.

rossdavidh 8y ago

the "stupid arrow syntax" is not nearly so stupid, and I speak here as a 10+ year Python developer, as the misuse of the equal sign that every C-style language seems to think is ok. The = sign meant something long before computer programming, and it is something the developer community ought to be ashamed of that it is being used for "change this thing to that". /rant

peatmoss 8y ago
R was originally not much more than a bunch of Scheme macros if I understand the history right. Suspect <- may have just been an infix macro for define at one point. Of course I probably would have preferred just keeping the lispy syntax of scheme without all the infix stuff!
YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
Well, the "=" operator is eas to type since it's on pretty much every keyboard and probably has been for ever. And it's faster than typing a two-symbol operator like := or <- so. If you want "=" to (more or less) mean what it used to mean "long before computer programming", try Prolog. ?- a = a. true. ?- a = b. false. ?- A = a. A = a. ?- A = a, A = b. false. ?- A = a, A = B. A = B, B = a. ?- A == B. false. ?- A = B, A == B. A = B. Nice? Most programmers would pull their hair from the root at all this :) (hint: "=" is not assignment, neither is it equality and "==" is just a stricter version thereof).
jejones3141 8y ago
I would willingly put up with the stupid arrow syntax if I could use ← for it, and with the gratuitously confusing to people coming from other languages use of [[ ]] for an element of a list rather than a sublist if I could use ⟦ ⟧.