4 ms·
Could you point out where in that pamphlet there are criticisms of R? I see a Scheme tutorial prefaced by a petulant diatribe against programming languages that
by orhmeh09 8y ago
Could you point out where in that pamphlet there are criticisms of R? I see a Scheme tutorial prefaced by a petulant diatribe against programming languages that are not Scheme, and nothing specific about R. I quote, “On the other hand, being a rather seasoned Schemer, I knew that most of these languages were only inferior incarnations of Lisp, and I could find little value in learning a new syntactical disguise for those well-established concepts.
I was very soon to find out that my skepticism was right, and that learning R would require internalizing a lot of unfortunate idiosyncrasies that the authors of the language had chosen for their own reasons, and that I would be constantly stumbling over those incomprehensible limitations and discrep- ancies between common practices and the language developers’ decisions.”
And, “However, the case of the R programming language is particularly interesting, because initially it was just a harmless implementation of Scheme; but then as a result of the irresponsible experiments of mad scientists it mutated into a monster.”
I have a hard time taking this seriously, and it probably isn’t meant to be taken as such. It has practically nothing to do with R so I don’t know why one would bring it up.
- xte 8y agoMaybe adding Greenspun's tenth rule (ref. Wikipedia) or adding the recent "A Programmable Programming Language" [1] or even "Why Lisp" [2]... Saying "gasoline car sucks" IMO automatically imply that any car using gasoline sucks, or if you prefer "$type car outshine any other car type". [1] https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2018/3/225475-a-programmable-programming-language/fulltext https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2018/3/225475-a-programmable-... [2] http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/introduction-why-lisp.html http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/introduction-why-lisp.html