| ▲ | UniverseHacker 8 hours ago | |
Doing computational biology for several decades in about a dozen languages, I do think R is a much better language for data science, but in practice I end up using Python almost every time because it has more libraries, and it’s easier to find software engineers and collaborators to work on Python. However, R makes for much simpler cleaner code, less silent errors, and the 1 indexing makes dealing with biological sequences much less hassle. | ||
| ▲ | 3eb7988a1663 6 hours ago | parent [-] | |
Pardon? Less silent errors? R has quite a few foot guns around permissively parsing user intention. Which does make it handy for exploratory analysis, but a lot more fragile when you want production code. Just a simple one that can get you, R is 1-indexed. Yet if you have a vector, accessing myvec[0] is not an error. Alternatively, if you had say, a vector length of 3 and do myvec[10] that gets NA (an otherwise legal value). Or you could make an assignment past the end of the vector myvec[15] <- 3.14 , which will silently extend the array, inserting NAs | ||