R Passes SAS in Scholarly Use

Re:R Passes SAS in Scholarly Use by jnbiche on Thursday June 09, 2016 @09:21AM (#11869157)

Have you even looked at pandas? I get the impression you haven't. Pandas has most of the statistical utility functions that R does, and for those few that it lacks, Python/Pandas also has available an easy-to-use FFI interface to R via rpy2.

Take a look: http://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/

EDIT: Specified name of interface (rpy2).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:R Passes SAS in Scholarly Use by blahi on Thursday June 09, 2016 @01:03PM (#11870674)

Have you even looked at statistics? I get the impression you haven't. Pandas has aggregation and that's it. I don't really like to start those language wars, but what the heck. Your precious pandas is actually worse than the R alternatives in every way. It is slower than data.table while having comparable syntax. Dplyr is comparable in speed while having WAY better syntax.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:R Passes SAS in Scholarly Use by cwyers on Thursday June 09, 2016 @10:51AM (#11869744)

> Pandas has most of the statistical utility functions that R does

Pandas is not shipping with most of the stuff you can get on CRAN.

[ Parent | on HN ]