Re:Groundhog: Addressing the Threat That R Poses to Reproduc...
by notafraudster on Thursday January 07, 2021 @01:41AM
(#25667970)
Agreed that renv is a better solution here. Even the example code for Groundhog is not written in idiomatic R which does not inspire confidence. Simonssohn is a legend in transparent research but not primarily a coder or software tool contributor (take a look at the source for p-curve if you want to see what I mean) and I think a secondary threat to reproducibility is relying on tools that end up abandoned or deprecated or for which bugs never get fixed.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Groundhog: Addressing the Threat That R Poses to Reproduc...
by vharuck on Thursday January 07, 2021 @08:01AM
(#25670480)
>Even the example code for Groundhog is not written in idiomatic R which does not inspire confidence.
Not to mention the given example for irreproducibility in base R looks at code that would be a bug in the script for 3.6. It's only useful to keep this reproducible if I'm debugging the script.
And, in this case, anyone who's proficient with R would recognize this problem from personal experience or the many warnings in tutorials. I usually wouldn't shoot down a given example as though it disproved the existence of any example, but I don't know if there is another example. Unless old code relied on undocumented or contrary-to-documented behavior.