User talk:Richie Cotton

From Rosetta Code

Hi Richie. Thanks for cleaning up my comments and code. I was wondering about a bit of policy/approaches for this project as a result of looking at your extension to Plot x, y arrays. Given the vast number of packages in R and methods of accomplishing things do you think it is appropriate for us to list every possible way to perform a task, or should we limit ourselves (when possible) to what can be done within the base packages? For example, I could add the rgl solution to Plot X, Y arrays, but it seems like overkill to me. -Russell Pierce 19:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

If you don't mind me butting in, I think you should try to keep all of your examples as simple as possible. In my experience learning how to program things, if I see an example page (on any website or in documentation) that has too many different ways of doing things, I get a little turned off. Also, we've recently run into a couple of problems with pages being too large so putting "every possible way" may actually create problems for the site if it's not done properly. --Mwn3d 19:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

In general, I agree with the sentiment that examples should be limited to the simplest possible case. The different plotting paradigms are such a fundamental thing in R though, that it seems a shame not to mention them. I personally find that in practical usage, I seldom use base graphics anymore. If you really want to trim it, then I'd say to get rid of the ggplot2 example, but keep the lattice one. The final decision should be made by someone who has been contributing longer than myself. --Richie Cotton 19:45, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Standard Deviation

Richie, someone clobbered the R and Racket implementations of Standard deviation. I think I've restored them, but if you're interested, you might want to take a peek and see if all is right. --Tim-brown (talk) 07:07, 11 September 2015 (UTC)