> I say "decent" because most of the available training data for Pandas does things in a naive way. They're around the level of the median user, which is prett

> I say "decent" because most of the available training data for Pandas does things in a naive way. They're around the level of the median user, which is pretty bad as pandas is a big and complicated API with many different approaches available (as is base R, in case people think I'm just hating on pandas).