3 ms·
I still think that R has more users then Python with Pandas BUT the perception is that Pandas is bigger and better. I started with Pandas and learned R. I find
by baldfat 13y ago
I still think that R has more users then Python with Pandas BUT the perception is that Pandas is bigger and better.
I started with Pandas and learned R. I find that R is just better and if R isn't right then Julia or Closure will do the work.
The tools in R are just better and more varied.
- jimmar 13y agoI've done some social science statistical analysis in R. I tried to reproduce the analysis using Python over the weekend, but the tools just aren't there. For example, doing a within-subjects ANOVA in R is maybe 3 lines of code. No native functions exist to do it in Python. Structural equation modelling? It doesn't exist in Python. I'm fairly sure that going forward, people will implement common social science statistical procedures in Python, but I need them today.
- baldfat 13y agoI just don't know if Python will actually be better after the tools are there. What R does is good what python will eventually be is good but not necessarily better.
- peatmoss 13y agoI think Python may be closer to ready if you're doing Bayesian stats. Going through some quantitative coursework for a phd in a social science, my experience has been that for frequentist stats, R has everything and Python has a tiny fraction. On the other hand, I'm taking a Bayesian course now, and am thinking that I could probably do the whole works in Python with little effort. That said, I'm not sure doing things in Python would actually buy me anything over R. If I were to do something other than R it would probably be something like Julia or Clojure, but that would also be more for my amusement rather than for any practical reason.