2 ms·

No, R is a serious general purpose programming language that is great for building almost any type of complex scientific software with. Projects like Bioconduct

by _yb2s 11mo ago

No, R is a serious general purpose programming language that is great for building almost any type of complex scientific software with. Projects like Bioconductor are a good example.

evolighting 11mo ago
Perhaps a in a context of comparison with Python? In my limited experience, Using R feels like to using JavaScript in the browser: it's a platform heavily focused on advanced, feature-rich objects (such as DataFrames and specialized plot objects). but you could also just build almost anything with it.
blubber 11mo ago
No, it's not. Even established packages have bugs caused by R weirdness. I like it nevertheless.
- Cosi1125 11mo ago
  Care to give some examples?
  - _yb2s 11mo ago
    I already did in my comment
    - Cosi1125 11mo ago
      Hmm? I was referring to blubber's claim that "established packages have bugs caused by R weirdness."
- northlondoner 11mo ago
  Yes, R is a proper general purpose programming language. Turing complete, functional, procedural, object oriented.../
  - steine65 11mo ago
    Just in case someone reads this far and sees blubber's confident "No." Blubber is definitely wrong here. I used to do all of my programming in R. Throw the question into an LLM if you're wondering if R has a package like ___ in python.
    - blubber 11mo ago
      I know people who used Visual Basic for all of their programming. I'd say No either way unless people explained to me without bursting out into laughter that they also have extensive experience with, e.g., Kotlin, Rust, C#, Java etc. and still prefer VB or R for non-trivial programs.
      - northlondoner 11mo ago
        Of course R isn't a complied language and probably not the same category as C/Rust as systems language but is not in the same category as VB. R is a serious scientific programming language used in non-trivial programs for industrial applications. See Posit's customers. I suggest John Chambers ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Chambers_(statistician) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Chambers_(statistician) ) book, he explain how he designed S language, R's grandfather so to speak, Software for Data Analysis ( https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-0-387-75936-4 https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-0-387-75936-4 ).
        blubber 11mo ago
        This isn't about compilation vs interpretation. R is simply badly designed as a programming language. This doesn't change just because its inventor wrote a book.
      - Cosi1125 11mo ago
        I do. And I'm still waiting for your examples of "established R packages with bugs caused by R weirdness".
      - northlondoner 11mo ago

by _yb2s 11mo ago

No, R is a serious general purpose programming language that is great for building almost any type of complex scientific software with. Projects like Bioconductor are a good example.

evolighting 11mo ago

Perhaps a in a context of comparison with Python? In my limited experience, Using R feels like to using JavaScript in the browser: it's a platform heavily focused on advanced, feature-rich objects (such as DataFrames and specialized plot objects). but you could also just build almost anything with it.

blubber 11mo ago

No, it's not. Even established packages have bugs caused by R weirdness. I like it nevertheless.

Cosi1125 11mo ago
Care to give some examples?
- _yb2s 11mo ago
  I already did in my comment
  - Cosi1125 11mo ago
    Hmm? I was referring to blubber's claim that "established packages have bugs caused by R weirdness."
northlondoner 11mo ago
Yes, R is a proper general purpose programming language. Turing complete, functional, procedural, object oriented.../
- steine65 11mo ago
  Just in case someone reads this far and sees blubber's confident "No." Blubber is definitely wrong here. I used to do all of my programming in R. Throw the question into an LLM if you're wondering if R has a package like ___ in python.
  - blubber 11mo ago
    I know people who used Visual Basic for all of their programming. I'd say No either way unless people explained to me without bursting out into laughter that they also have extensive experience with, e.g., Kotlin, Rust, C#, Java etc. and still prefer VB or R for non-trivial programs.
    - northlondoner 11mo ago
      Of course R isn't a complied language and probably not the same category as C/Rust as systems language but is not in the same category as VB. R is a serious scientific programming language used in non-trivial programs for industrial applications. See Posit's customers. I suggest John Chambers ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Chambers_(statistician) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Chambers_(statistician) ) book, he explain how he designed S language, R's grandfather so to speak, Software for Data Analysis ( https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-0-387-75936-4 https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-0-387-75936-4 ).
      - blubber 11mo ago
        This isn't about compilation vs interpretation. R is simply badly designed as a programming language. This doesn't change just because its inventor wrote a book.
    - Cosi1125 11mo ago
      I do. And I'm still waiting for your examples of "established R packages with bugs caused by R weirdness".
    - northlondoner 11mo ago