Parsing R code: Freedom of expression is not always a good idea (2012)

Re:Parsing R code: Freedom of expression is not always a goo... by klrall on Tuesday June 14, 2022 @09:12AM (#31738915)

Freedom of expression helps you think though. Lisp is helping the thoughts, other languages obstruct them (that certainly includes Python).

For a scientific language like R this quality is important.

Perhaps the ideal data science language would be a Lisp/R with excellent embedding qualities like Lua for the scientific parts. People could then choose their favorite language for shoveling data around.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Parsing R code: Freedom of expression is not always a goo... by NeutralForest on Tuesday June 14, 2022 @10:25AM (#31740003)

Why would say Python obstructs the thought?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Parsing R code: Freedom of expression is not always a goo... by wdkrnls on Tuesday June 14, 2022 @04:46PM (#31745832)

Because with original thinking there is more than one way to do it. Pythonic conformity might make long term maintenance easier, but it's rigidity exacts a cost on expressing new thoughts. R is basically the epitome of Greenspun's 10th rule: it's really their implementation of a common lisp that looks like C with metaprogramming and conditions and restarts and all. They tried standardizing on Common Lisp first (XLisp-Stat) but S from Bell Labs was too popular. In short, today R is a lisp with access to modern numeric libraries.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Parsing R code: Freedom of expression is not always a goo... by sshine on Tuesday June 14, 2022 @04:41PM (#31745771)

Duck typing allows for freedom of expression/thinking.

You can declare a new property on an object simply by assigning, and consistency is not required either.

It also potentially leaves a mess over time.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Parsing R code: Freedom of expression is not always a goo... by disgruntledphd2 on Tuesday June 14, 2022 @11:08AM (#31740610)

Python doesn't, but pandas definitely does.

[ Parent | on HN ]