
Discussions on the future of R - fogus
http://www.r-bloggers.com/RUG/2011/02/discussions-on-the-future-of-r/
======
hessenwolf
Eee gads, no... but it has all of those libraries...

How would a replacement gain traction? Can we at least make sure it can call R
code?

Can we not just include the features of R in python, instead of using a new
language? Has anybody used Rpy? How does it do with packages?

------
goalieca
R is a language that also plagues beginners. I am well versed in nearly a
dozen languages ranging from procedural to functional but I find R as
mysterious as LaTeX. Those languages are incomprehensible.

~~~
hsmyers
Secret to understanding/using LaTeX is to have at hand two books: Guide to
LaTeX by Kopka and Daly, and The LaTeX Companion by Mittelbach and Goossens.
That plus a project to publish (similar to have a task you want to program)
should be enough to get you going. The real problem with LaTeX seems to be
retention over time without continued use--- if you don't use it more or less
all the time, you tend to forget a lot of the basics...

------
reirob
The presentation reads as a nice advertisement for Clojure. I do not like
Clojure because it runs on JVM and all the Java stuff leaves a bitter taste in
my mouth - it is a language that was forced down our throats by industry.

If they really want to rewrite R from the start to create a new language why
don't they use Haskell? It will compile to machine code, it is ready for using
multiple cores, it does not embrace JVM.

My 2 cents

------
fxj
hopefully the R community is avoiding the same mistake that python did with
python3000.

my 2 ct to the future of R: a compiler from R code to LISP would more than
fill the gap.

