[R-gui] Re: [R] The hidden costs of GPL software?

[A.J. Rossini]

Note that there are bits and pieces of IDE components within ESS,
provided that you use some of the other tools available (in
particular, ECB).  I've not finished integration, but it provides
tools comparable to JDEE (the Emacs Java IDE), which isn't far off
from Eclipse in many ways.

Currently, it does provide limited source code navigation within the
file, for example to functions and "data assignments".  Next would be
some of the code generation tools, but that becomes tricky.

Applications programming is NOT statistical programming, and this
point needs to be hammered in, sometimes.  There is a duality with R
(and similar interactive (not necessarily interpretive) programming
languages used for data analysis such as Lisp, Perl, and Python)

An IDE for statistical analysis is different than what one wants from
a GUI, or from an IDE for applications programming.

best,
-tony

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 04:37:04 -0800 (PST), Michael Grant
<mwgrant2001 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> --- Duncan Murdoch <murdoch at stats.uwo.ca> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:24:01 -0800 (PST), Michael
> > Grant
> > <mwgrant2001 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Hmmmm, interesting thread and minds will not be
> > >changed but regarding GUIs...I thought S (aka R)
> 
> ...
> 
> >
> > I have to disagree with you.  What you say might be
> > true about *bad*
> > GUIs, but I find nothing more frustrating than the
> > lack of programming
> > support in R.
> >
> > What's a nice GUI for programming?
> >
> > You should be able to edit code, and have R parse
> > the code that you
> > are editing
> ...
> [snip] [snip] [snip]
> ...
> > All of these things have existed for years in IDEs
> > (i.e. programming
> > GUIs), but most are not in R's GUIs.
> 
> I guess we'll just agree to disagree. :O)
> 1.)The LACK of programming support? Isn't that a bit
> of an overstatement? There are materials available, as
> of ciurse you are aware. At one time or another many
> of us may find it difficult to determine some 'key'
> programming information at the moment. But you know
> something, I've  had that happen using the packages
> like you describe--this includes wired IDE help,
> original documentation, and 3rd party books. I accept
> that as a condition for using both free and commercial
> software. And if the particular burden is too great,
> then I don't use the product. Such is life :O)
> 
> 2.)As you indicate below, R doesn't not have a VB or
> VC++ style IDE. R doesn't have the development
> environment of Smalltalk or the commercial LISPs
> (sigh...) But, really, an IDE is a bit more than a
> GUI, wouldn't you agree? A GUI is just one component
> of an IDE.
> 
> Perhaps part of our difference is how we view
> programming. I view it more as a form of expression
> using a LANGUAGE. Like any language, e.g., English,
> French, Chinese, you have to develop a degree of
> fluency to express yourself. Some people are
> comfortable working with a phrase book and others put
> more effort in to learn to converse sans book. Both
> approaches are quite legitimate in that either can get
> the job done. (And both can fail miserably!)
> 
> >From another perspective, I can not deny that having a
> real GUI would be nice at times even for a grump like
> myself. And not having such is a cost. But in my case
> that cost is not the deciding factor. The fact is, I
> by preference do a lot of coding--both at the
> quick/dirty scale and the project scale--in R that I
> could do in C/C++, FORTRAN, BASIC. I have those tools
> in commerical form with IDEs
> 
> Why R? The turn around is so fast by comparison. R/S
> is language in which I can much more easily and
> quickly express myself.  The development team has done
> a lot of work developing my high-level language for me
> :O). (Note--my second hacking language is  lisp-stat,
> also an interpreted, higher functionality language.) I
> don't use most of R's capabilities, and 'not knowing
> that which I do not know' is not an issue. When I need
> something new I am able to learn it incrementally on
> top of what I already know.
> ...
> >
> > That's one sort of GUI that R could have, but it's
> > not the only one,
> > and it's not the one that I'd use.  However, I might
> > start out
> > students on it.  There's a big benefit to a list of
> > suggestions as
> > opposed to a big blank space.
> Did I suggest banning GUIs? I don't think so. Your
> world is one where there are benefit for your
> clients--the students. My world is turn around and
> documentation. Coding is easier to document than a
> complex sequence of menu actions. Indeed I would get
> laughed out of Dodge City if I documented a set of
> calculations: " next I clicked ...". It's that just
> different requirements lead to different needs.
> 
> >
> > >GUIs encourage a passive approach to using
> > computers
> > >when solving problems. In addition, it is
> > regretable
> ...
> [snip]
> ...
> > >gather 'electronic dust'.
> >
> > A lot of people do incomplete or incorrect work
> > because they don't
> > know any better.  It doesn't matter if they're using
> > a GUI or not,
> > they'll do what they think they know, and get it
> > wrong.
> 
> Of course that is the case, but the limitations in a
> given GUI is one more thing that puts such people in
> rationalized comfort-zone with their actions.
> (Typically I see this with EXCEL apps--99.9% of the
> people in my trade run away from statistical
> software.)
> More than once I have seen this occur in a senior
> scientist review capacity after management has seen
> the product and 'accepted' its results. Doom, doom,
> doom...shoot the messenger! Oh woe, oh woe!:O(.
> 
> Best regards, Duncan
> Michael
> 
> _______________________________________________
> R-SIG-GUI mailing list
> R-SIG-GUI at stat.math.ethz.ch
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-gui
> 


-- 

best,
-tony

---
A.J. Rossini
blindglobe at gmail.com