Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

FWIW the separate `group_by()` is one of my greatest design regrets with dplyr — I wish I had made `by` a parameter of `summarise()`, `mutate()`, `filter()` etc.



Thanks for commenting! I hope you can see the influence of dplyr & tidyverse here. Please let me know if you have any other feedback!


Is it too deeply entrenched to change? The number of times I have had a data.frame grouped when it wasn't supposed to be, I can count on my fingers. But the hours that I spent trying to figure it out must amount to a paycheck or two.


There's a lot of dplyr code out there, and a lot of people who know most every part of the tidyverse by heart, making breaking changes like this so far into a frameworks life would cause a lot of unnecessary work in re-coding old code as well as requring people to re-learn syntax.

IMO for such a small adjustment the benefits don't outweight the costs.


Yeah, that's my current position. It's possible that we might be able to add it in optionally (by adding a new `.by` argument to summarise and friends), but just the analysis to determine how it would affect existing code is a lot of work.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: