matloff / matloff/R-vs.-Python-for-Data-Science
You didn't show any benchmarks
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- No language data
- Stars
- 448
- Forks
- 40
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Facts are better than opinion.
The entire draft is just what you feel like. You didn't mention oops in r from s3 to s4 r6 and proto
And there are no benchmarks for parallel programming.
It must have took you a lot of time but its just not satisfactory for any programmer to read. Unless you show hard facts and proof.
Thanks again for such an articles
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No file, test, or entry point is named. First locate the article draft and determine how its R-versus-Python claims are organized; the issue would be done when it includes reproducible benchmark evidence for parallel programming and addresses the requested version details.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python, r
- Domain
- documentation, performance
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 18/100