3 ms·
My impression was that the last time I was using R intensively there was a movement back from tidyverse to base R. But that's a few years ago, so you say that's
by t_mann 4y ago
My impression was that the last time I was using R intensively there was a movement back from tidyverse to base R. But that's a few years ago, so you say that's reversed again?
I'm not against it at all, in fact I was doing nearly all of my work in dplyr, reshape, ggplot,... and I second that it's much more convenient and intuitive than the various apply's,...
My impression was that it was quite political and Hadley Wickham had antagonized some people in the core R community (and tbf, it was a bit annoying with him introducing redundant packages, reinventing and relabelling multiple ways of doing the same things, and presenting each new iteration as the end-all-be-all).
- civilized 4y agoI'd say there was been a backlash against tidyverse, but tidyverse is beloved by most new R programmers, and fighting it is a one-way ticket to irrelevance. Re: antagonistic behavior, I would just recommend that all participants consider the old glass houses proverb as applicable to themselves, and try to do better going forward.
- Fomite 4y agoIn contrast, in my experience students relying heavily on tidyverse love it - but are also poorly positioned for doing anything that's not contained in an easily found template.
- civilized 4y agoI don't think that is the tidyverse's fault. Learning the tidyverse doesn't corrupt your brain and make it impossible to learn about vectors and subscripts.