Live data from Hacker News

Try R — A new online course, for free

oreilly.com

81–90 of 128 posts

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#81
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This pretty much perfectly illustrates my comment below, pointing out that these sorts of recommendations are entirely subjective and useless. Many of your points are quite subjective. I could do the same thing with Matlab. For instance, I find it mind boggling that anyone could get anything done when you have to devote a separate file to every single functions. That seems incomprehensible to me. And yet, I realize t…

You make good points, however I have to take issue with the documentation. > When people complain about it, it's usually because they have mistaken it for a tutorial. It's not. It's documentation. I don't really see the distinction. Documentation is supposed to explain to you how to use the code. You can call it whatever you want. If it's through a tutorial, then why not. R - and especially the non-standard packages…

From my memory, MATLAB's documentation not only discusses the implementation, but also discusses the statistical/engineering methodology. It's overkill and can be pretty annoying (paging back and forth between different parts of the help can be somewhat time consuming) when you actually know the statistics but just want to understand the implementation. Hence the distinction between "documentation" and "a tutorial".

I don't know whether it's an explicit or implicit design choice or just a happy accident, but I'm grateful that the R documentation doesn't try to hold anyone's hand and guide them through data analysis beyond their training.

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#82

I do most of my stats work in Matlab, why should I use R?

Really concise notation for statistical analysis:

m Things like heteroskedasticity-robust hypothesis testing, GLM, time-series models are supported without purchasing extra packages or coding it yourself. The graphics are much better and lattice/trellis plots are supported natively (I don't think there's any good way to them in matlab).

Basically, the stats and graphics are easy enough to type that you can do all of the exploratory data analysis that you (should) feel guilty for skipping when you use matlab. :)

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#83

I shouldn't have to enable JavaScript to try R.

"I want to partake in all the goodness the modern internet has to offer... but only on my terms!"

There was a time when NoJS plugins and the likes were valid (neccessary). These days you're crippling your browser experience more and more. Which is entirely your perogative of course, but then don't make sweeping complainst about things not working.

What did you really expect? Them to run your R code server side?

a) This wouldn't allow the same snappy response, you'd have constant page refreshes.

b) why should they overload their servers, and come up with an inferior solution to serve some self entitled anti javascript snob.

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#84
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found Python + Pandas much better in this regard than R. Maybe it's just me, but for grouping, indexing, and manipulating tabular data, Python syntax just makes more sense. That said, R is better for stats and matrix operations.

Are you using Pandas? If so, your comment would be ironic because pandas borrows heavily from R ;)

What has pandas borrowed from R, other than a 2D data structure with heterogeneously-typed columns?

I guess the data frame merge invocations are similar.

(I know patsy/statsmodels are introducing R's formula syntax to python, but that's not pandas.)

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#85

I do most of my stats work in Matlab, why should I use R?

Don't. I've used both extensively (though not for statistics). R's syntax is a little more C-like and consistent than MATLAB's - however the biggest difference is documentation. R's, like most open source documentation, is rather terse and often very unsatisfactory. This gets especially apparent once you get into 3rd party libraries and use things like Bioconductor. You’ll have no idea how things are designed to be u…

I came here to say this as well - Don't. This is of course my own opinion, and I can only promise this comment will get progressively more subjective the farther you read.

R's documentation is terse and unorganized. Anyone who says different is obviously someone with more experience with the language (which is not how it should be). When people complain about the documentation it's because they're trying to learn, and if the documentation isn't together learning is painful. Learning R is painful.

Next- Learning is painful, and the documentation is horrible because: the actual built in functions or extensions are a nightmare of arguments that [sometimes do/sometimes don't work]. If you plot x and you don't want the key to show up then set auto.key=FALSE, if you plot class(x) = [something else] and don't want the key to show up set colorkey=FALSE, if you want to layer plots: load this library and format your data to a new S3/S4 (object) type, add them together, then plot them (without the library you can't add these objects)... In case you didn't catch that: I wanted to layer the plots so I had to load a function that made the objects I wanted to plot add, not load a library that would change the plotting driver.

The community around R is disenchanted. If you get into the right place on the web and ask about a feature that doesn't exist: more often than not I've seen the typical guru response of the type "It doesn't work that way - that's a feature, not a problem." Change is bad, and in my experience generally discouraged.

Finally (and perhaps this really doesn't need to be said) the more I've been working with it - the more I feel like the reason it is so popular is because you can load it up read your data set, google some of the more central functions, and poof - get that set of characteristic statistical answers everyone needs to have in their [presentation/HW assignment]. If you look at the answers in this thread you get 2 types A) it's impossible to use, B) it does standard statistical analysis really easily. In my narrow world view it appeals to people who don't work with software a lot - professionals who need some automated numbers on the side without hiring someone to do it right.

That all said, I still do use R. You can do some nifty statistical analysis pretty easily and push it to a vector plot, pop it open with your favorite editor and post edit it super pretty (in a few days).

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#86
post #12
post #4

I really like this, but one big complaint is that the auto-scroll after completing a little task isn't correct. So each time after I "pass" a particular section, I have to manually scroll down with my trackpad.

Gregg here from Code School.. we actually tried making it autoscroll down at first. It was too distracting and annoying. Scrolling down when you're ready to continue just felt more natural.

Perhaps leave autoscroll as an option? I don't like having to type, move my hand to the mouse, scroll, move my hand to the keyboard, and repeat.

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#87
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found Python + Pandas much better in this regard than R. Maybe it's just me, but for grouping, indexing, and manipulating tabular data, Python syntax just makes more sense. That said, R is better for stats and matrix operations.

Are you using Pandas? If so, your comment would be ironic because pandas borrows heavily from R ;)

They might have borrowed from R. Wes McKinney admits to being influenced by R especialy data frames...but it makes data analysis all the more easier when i can do everything i want within the the Python environment. pandas is proving to be a bit of a longer learning curve i must admit, but then the python environment and native Matplotlib support made life oh so much simpler.

That's just me though.

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#88

I do most of my stats work in Matlab, why should I use R?

Don't. I've used both extensively (though not for statistics). R's syntax is a little more C-like and consistent than MATLAB's - however the biggest difference is documentation. R's, like most open source documentation, is rather terse and often very unsatisfactory. This gets especially apparent once you get into 3rd party libraries and use things like Bioconductor. You’ll have no idea how things are designed to be u…

R's documentation is fantastic (the stuff summoned up by ?foo). If you want bad documentation, look to scipy.

(I'm not particularly an R fan. It's great for stats, numerical calculations and plotting, but it's not a good programming language.)

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#89
post #27

I'm just going through this and while I love the concept, there is one criticism from me. The course is very comfortable to walk through, but it doesn't make use of the benefits of the online environment. It is just "this is how it goes, now type it" kind of teaching. I am almost done with the second session, and most likely have completely forgotten most of the content from the first. If anybody else is going to try…

Same here. And sometimes after being introduced to a concept or function, I will wonder, "hmm, what if i do this.." but the embedded REPL doesn't allow you to tinker.

Re: Try R — A new online course, for free

#90
post #53

Beautiful website. I highly recommend supplementing a course like this (where you learn about the language's ecosystem) with the R Cookbook from O'Reilly. It's been a lifesaver for me, and helped me learn R over the course of a few months of needing it at a new job. Now I find that I need to learn something else for data munging- R is terrible at data manipulation and querying. The querying bit is solvable with the i…

I actually find base R excellent for data munging and manipulation, even without using additional packages. Here is a reproducible example that very easily accomplishes what you were trying to do (first two lines just set up a sample data frame) set.seed(123) dfrm Basic R functions like subset, transform, with(in), reshape, aggregate, (a,ma,ta,sa,va}pply, match, grep(l), by, split, table, etc. allow you to accomplish…

One drawback with R is that in computations like this, several intermediate data structures with one dimension equal in length to nrow(dfrm) are allocated. Traversing an iterable of tuples is a simple way to think about it, is efficient, and ties in with other technologies e.g. relational databases. R is often people's first language (e.g. science graduates) and those people would be better off learning how to iterate over tuples than learning the obscure bestiary of data structure manipulators you point out.
Post reply on HN