Live data from Hacker News

RStudio is now Posit

posit.co

61–66 of 66 posts

Re: RStudio is now Posit

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Base R is loved only by those who were unlucky enough to spend years using it when there was no alternative.

Or anyone who has tried to re-run R code that was written more 6 months ago.

I write R full-time using the full suite of tidyverse packages and that's just not an issue these days. Maybe a few years ago.

And anyway, you'll hit the same issue using third-party packages in any language.

Re: RStudio is now Posit

#63
post #13
post #7

From Hadley's video blurb, the ringer is when he states "things just work" in the R environment vis-à-vis python (where he tactfully yet implicitly acknowledges the shitshow that is the python library/package/environment management). Kudos to the R community and supporters for providing a great and useful platform!

> acknowledges the shitshow that is the python library/package/environment management I'm puzzled by this and wonder if you can provide some examples. The scientists I know tend to have incredibly disorganized R code, with a bunch of hard-coded paths and a single global environment in their home directory that all their R packages get installed to. Even stuff that seems critically important like reproducible science…

While I tend to agree with most of the arguments that DS code is usually of low quality, and that DS are not well-trained in good development practices, I wonder if making them better coders is an attainable goal, or even a proper one. My reasons for that questioning: - Data science requires a significant stack of knowledge beyond coding - in fact, to be a useful DS in a company, you already have to learn about maths, business domains, keep up with the latest algorithms, know how to manipulate data, present, run experiments, analyse them, know deep statistics and some others I am probably forgetting. Adding the SW dev skills on top of that and expecting them to become good developers is a tall order, and only a small percentage of the DS community will achieve it. With the level of demand for ML, I don’t know if this will deliver on the market needs - it’s not that it’s not attainable, I think it’s not scalable; - People coming from a SW dev background tend to think DS is the same, just done by people who don’t code well. That is not true: code is the final product of software development, while it is but a tool for reaching the goal of finding a good ML approach for a DS. The consequence here is that SW dev has a much stronger reason for wanting good quality, maintainable code than DS does. When researching for a solution, many iterations of code written by DS will be discarded without ever having to go to production, and I don’t know if the overhead of keeping good tests, structuring the code, making small commits, etc., is justifiable in this scenario - the goal is not to have maintainable code, it is to see if the model+features has potential for solving the problem. - Evolution and maintenance are also a problem, because the structure that’s good for operations doesn’t help the job of research - it’s not common for a DS to work in a pipeline structure (which seems to be the emerging pattern for MLOps), and forcing them to use that structure on all iterations after the first will have significant productivity issues, to the point of putting success at risk;

I don’t have a solution for the points above, and I understand that, once a promising approach has been found, the code starts to matter much more, because Ops will require it to be automated and executed in a reliable way. For now, what I do is to do the research in a very loose way, not caring about good SW practices. When I find something good, I start refactoring the code to meet the Ops expectations. But I’m a CS major with decades of experience in coding and ML - it’s not reasonable to expect the entire DS community to develop the same skills, it takes too long.

Any ideas out there?

Re: RStudio is now Posit

#64
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

R is great, and so are some of the packages that lead to the tidyverse, but I think the latter was a bit too much. Re-inventing what already worked with new packages, always overloading R syntax in weird ways (looking at you, ggplot2). I've actually found myself moving back to base R for many of the more basic manipulation tasks.

Base R is loved only by those who were unlucky enough to spend years using it when there was no alternative.

Base R is far from perfect, but for many basic manipulation tasks it works just as fine as tidyverse. Maybe not with piping, but that doesn't really save anything if you format it readably.

There's something to be said about code that just works out of the box. I don't see the need to maximize dependence on third-party libraries as long as the gains are purely "ergonomic". Especially when the creators have a somewhat mixed record regarding long-term commitment vs re-inventing their own wheel.

The real selling point of R imho aren't the data science tools anyway - for that we already have the amazing Python ecosystem (which also the RStudio guys have tacitly admitted with their rebranding) - but the pure statistics packages. Especially if you need something more niche, to the point that you'd use any language just to get an implementation of a specific model, you'll find yourself coming back to R more than half the time. It's simply the language of choice where most statisticians publish their code.

Re: RStudio is now Posit

#65
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Base R is loved only by those who were unlucky enough to spend years using it when there was no alternative.

Base R is far from perfect, but for many basic manipulation tasks it works just as fine as tidyverse. Maybe not with piping, but that doesn't really save anything if you format it readably. There's something to be said about code that just works out of the box. I don't see the need to maximize dependence on third-party libraries as long as the gains are purely "ergonomic". Especially when the creators have a somewhat…

R has some superior data science tools. For example, the tabular data packages dplyr and data.table have no adequate parallels in the Python world. There are many also-rans but no real rivals.

Re: RStudio is now Posit

#66

RStudio-2022.07.2-576 cannot start without R installed by the look of it: Error reading R script (), system error 2 (No such file or directory); Unable to find libR.dylib in expected locationswithin R Home directory /Library/Frameworks/R.framework/Resources

Yes. Installing R is literally step 1 in the r studio installation instructions.

https://posit.co/download/rstudio-desktop/

Post reply on HN