On GitHub’s Programming Languages

Re:On GitHub’s Programming Languages by cdnsteve on Thursday March 31, 2016 @02:38PM (#11399472)

Some of the correlations are interesting and could be used for marketing purposes.

Ruby: CSS is 25.76 Python: CSS is 15.75

Go is gaining fastest adoption from C, Ruby and Python developers.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On GitHub’s Programming Languages by wutf on Thursday March 31, 2016 @03:10PM (#11399743)

TBH I can't remember the last time I saw non-normalized correlations in a study and the paper lost some credibility.. who does that, and why? What does a correlation of 25.76 mean? Relative to what? That's why you bound it 0 to 1.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On GitHub’s Programming Languages by minimaxir on Thursday March 31, 2016 @03:55PM (#11400121)

Correlation is constrained to 0 and 1 as a side effect of the mathematics.

The definition of correlation mentioned in the paper makes zero sense whatsoever and apparently invokes Bayes's rule?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On GitHub’s Programming Languages by TearsInTheRain on Thursday March 31, 2016 @04:09PM (#11400222)

the correlation is that out of the people that program in language A, X% of them also program in language B. This can also be expressed as given that someone programs in language A, the probability that they program in language B is X. It looks like the table is expressing the correlation in terms of % even though they dont mention that on the table.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On GitHub’s Programming Languages by minimaxir on Thursday March 31, 2016 @04:13PM (#11400255)

EDIT: I'm dumb

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On GitHub’s Programming Languages by AnimalMuppet on Thursday March 31, 2016 @04:18PM (#11400289)

Because they're percentages.

Or are any of them greater than 100?

[ Parent | on HN ]