3 ms·
It's interesting, though, that those "clean" interfaces come with the horrors of non-standard evaluation and have caused a rather large divide between the tidyv
by mbauman 5y ago
It's interesting, though, that those "clean" interfaces come with the horrors of non-standard evaluation and have caused a rather large divide between the tidyverse and base R.
I fully disagree with the disparaging aspersions or even motives that TFA leans towards, though. I can see how this would arise out of a local minimum.
The "beauty" of R has always been its core DataFrame abstraction and the fact that a table is a language primitive — and that's where 90% of the consistency came from (from my outsiders' vantage point).
- dash2 5y agoIf you think data.frame is beautiful or consistent, try and guess what these do: d <- data.frame(a = 1:3, b = 1:3) d[4,] <- 1:3 # or d$c <- NULL # or d[c(T,F,T,F), 1] <- 1 Error handling? Who needs it?
- mbauman 5y agoHah, no I don't mean its _behaviors_ are beautiful by any means! The "beauty" is just that it had a complicated data structure built in as a primitive _looong_ ago that all packages standardized their APIs on.