5 ms·

Whoa, you know this is hacker news right? You don't get to call R elegant around these parts.

by clircle 4y ago

bryanrasmussen 4y ago
I think R is elegant, what's inelegant in it (other than the code lots of non-programmers write with it)?
- fny 4y ago
  It has 4 ways to do object orientation if IIRC, none of which are compatible.
  - bbertelsen 4y ago
    S3, S4, R6, and reference classes. To be fair they are situational and not one size fits all. The stricter ones are mainly used in biostats where significant metadata makes more sense in OO. S3 is nice and easy, primarily just a list with dispatches. Everything else is less so.
    - kgwgk 4y ago
      Don't forget R7. https://rconsortium.github.io/OOP-WG/ https://rconsortium.github.io/OOP-WG/
- nerdponx 4y ago
  Core language design? Definitely elegant in my opinion. F-expressions, clever "formula" syntax, everything is an array, great C/C++/Fortran interop. Standard library? Absolute chaos. Some elegant subsets, but mostly a mess that you learn to live with.
- isoprophlex 4y ago
  The type system is so abhorrent, it makes me wonder if it's actually proper to call R a real programming language
  - kgwgk 4y ago
    "There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses."
    - dunefox 4y ago
      This crappy quote is always used to justify bad design.
    - isoprophlex 4y ago
      I'm sorry, did you mean [1] "There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses." :^)
  - mike_ivanov 4y ago
    what specifically is abhorrent about it?
    - isoprophlex 4y ago
      The coercion always gets on my nerves, JavaScript gets a bad rep but R is pretty damn warty too; weird ass data types ('ordered factor', anyone) that just seem so very far away from design choices in other languages without being particularly ergonomic or aesthetically appealing
      - kyllo 4y ago
        The data types make sense to statisticians. Ordered factors are great when you need to fit, say, an ordered logit regression model.
      - mike_ivanov 4y ago
        Which coercion specifically are you talking about? Could you give an example? Weird data types: R had been designed for and by statisticians with their specific needs in mind, which indeed could look weird to regular people.
  - 4y ago
chubot 4y ago
R isn't elegant, but tidyverse is If you learn tidyverse, then you're going to cringe whenever you use Pandas or most things in the Python data science ecosystem https://www.rstudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/data-wrangling-cheatsheet.pdf https://www.rstudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/data-wran...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- clircle 4y ago
  Oh, I do cringe at Pandas.
adonig 4y ago
I remember when we first used R in a stochastic class. The professor (a mathematician) was in love with the language and the students (computer science) considered the language to be the PHP of science.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  as a computer scientist and programming languages nerd, I think R is a much better language than Python (comparing the two only because Python is leading in the data science field) I also believe that the tools available are superior, RStudio is very good IMO. I wonder why R has such a bad reputation.
  - kyllo 4y ago
    A lot of programmers dislike R for the same reason they dislike PHP: weak typing. If you can get over that, though, there's a lot to like about R. It's sort of like a hybrid between a Lisp and an array language.
    - chaxor 4y ago
      Iirc the scoping is also very strange. Certainly not as bad as mathematica, but bad nonetheless.
    - mike_ivanov 4y ago
      Weak typing? No, it's not. R is a strongly typed language. > 1 + "string" Error in 1 + "str" : non-numeric argument to binary operator
    - goatlover 4y ago
      Javascript and C also have weak typing. And Python isn't statically typed, it's just that like Ruby, it doesn't allow implicit conversion, except with numbers.
  - bart_spoon 4y ago
    Because it’s built around a very specialized set of needs (data manipulation, visualization, and statistical modeling), and it is essentially best in class at it, but it has quirks as a result. Anyone coming to R from a background in another language will feel those quirks intensely and assume it’s bad.

Whoa, you know this is hacker news right? You don't get to call R elegant around these parts.

bryanrasmussen 4y ago

I think R is elegant, what's inelegant in it (other than the code lots of non-programmers write with it)?

fny 4y ago
It has 4 ways to do object orientation if IIRC, none of which are compatible.
- bbertelsen 4y ago
  S3, S4, R6, and reference classes. To be fair they are situational and not one size fits all. The stricter ones are mainly used in biostats where significant metadata makes more sense in OO. S3 is nice and easy, primarily just a list with dispatches. Everything else is less so.
  - kgwgk 4y ago
    Don't forget R7. https://rconsortium.github.io/OOP-WG/ https://rconsortium.github.io/OOP-WG/
nerdponx 4y ago
Core language design? Definitely elegant in my opinion. F-expressions, clever "formula" syntax, everything is an array, great C/C++/Fortran interop. Standard library? Absolute chaos. Some elegant subsets, but mostly a mess that you learn to live with.
isoprophlex 4y ago
The type system is so abhorrent, it makes me wonder if it's actually proper to call R a real programming language
- kgwgk 4y ago
  "There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses."
  - dunefox 4y ago
    This crappy quote is always used to justify bad design.
  - isoprophlex 4y ago
    I'm sorry, did you mean [1] "There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses." :^)
- mike_ivanov 4y ago
  what specifically is abhorrent about it?
  - isoprophlex 4y ago
    The coercion always gets on my nerves, JavaScript gets a bad rep but R is pretty damn warty too; weird ass data types ('ordered factor', anyone) that just seem so very far away from design choices in other languages without being particularly ergonomic or aesthetically appealing
    - kyllo 4y ago
      The data types make sense to statisticians. Ordered factors are great when you need to fit, say, an ordered logit regression model.
    - mike_ivanov 4y ago
      Which coercion specifically are you talking about? Could you give an example? Weird data types: R had been designed for and by statisticians with their specific needs in mind, which indeed could look weird to regular people.
- 4y ago

chubot 4y ago

R isn't elegant, but tidyverse is If you learn tidyverse, then you're going to cringe whenever you use Pandas or most things in the Python data science ecosystem https://www.rstudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/data-wrangling-cheatsheet.pdf https://www.rstudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/data-wran...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
clircle 4y ago
Oh, I do cringe at Pandas.

adonig 4y ago

I remember when we first used R in a stochastic class. The professor (a mathematician) was in love with the language and the students (computer science) considered the language to be the PHP of science.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
as a computer scientist and programming languages nerd, I think R is a much better language than Python (comparing the two only because Python is leading in the data science field) I also believe that the tools available are superior, RStudio is very good IMO. I wonder why R has such a bad reputation.
- kyllo 4y ago
  A lot of programmers dislike R for the same reason they dislike PHP: weak typing. If you can get over that, though, there's a lot to like about R. It's sort of like a hybrid between a Lisp and an array language.
  - chaxor 4y ago
    Iirc the scoping is also very strange. Certainly not as bad as mathematica, but bad nonetheless.
  - mike_ivanov 4y ago
    Weak typing? No, it's not. R is a strongly typed language. > 1 + "string" Error in 1 + "str" : non-numeric argument to binary operator
  - goatlover 4y ago
    Javascript and C also have weak typing. And Python isn't statically typed, it's just that like Ruby, it doesn't allow implicit conversion, except with numbers.
- bart_spoon 4y ago
  Because it’s built around a very specialized set of needs (data manipulation, visualization, and statistical modeling), and it is essentially best in class at it, but it has quirks as a result. Anyone coming to R from a background in another language will feel those quirks intensely and assume it’s bad.