From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Davison Subject: Re: Re: [babel] R questions Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:26:44 -0500 Message-ID: <87aaxt77p7.fsf@stats.ox.ac.uk> References: <87tyw674n2.fsf@mundaneum.com> <87aaxy8czu.fsf@stats.ox.ac.uk> <87bpi9aish.fsf@mundaneum.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NI2tp-0003FX-88 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:26:53 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NI2tl-00039m-3A for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:26:52 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=48763 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NI2tk-00039W-M7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:26:48 -0500 Received: from markov.stats.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.210.1]:38642) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NI2tk-0003xz-8C for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:26:48 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87bpi9aish.fsf@mundaneum.com> (=?utf-8?Q?=22S=C3=A9bastien?= Vauban"'s message of "Tue, 08 Dec 2009 10:58:54 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?S=C3=A9bastien?= Vauban Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org S=C3=A9bastien Vauban writes: > Hi Dan and Eric, > > I have a side question, but I think this is of general interest for other= s as > well. > > I almost don't know GnuPlot neither R -- yes, before seeing the light, I = used > Excel for all my graphs. > > So, my question is: for typical small plots (piecharts and barplots), is = there > any Org-babel reason that would advocate for doing it in one of the two a= bove > language preferably than in the other one? > Reasons could be better integration (for editing or (re-)generating the > graphs), simpler semantics (with NA values, for example), etc. Org-babel wants to support both languages as well as possible. So there is no such purely org-babel reason; or if there is, there shouldn't be, so tell us about it and we'll try to fix it. With respect to graphics, I'm sure that each one has things it can do better than the other (e.g. I get the impression that gnuplot is better for "3D" graphics). But yes, if there was someone who (a) didn't know either language, and (b) were limited in the amount of time they could devote to learning computer languages, and (c) thought they might one day have some use for some of the things that R can do and gnuplot can't, then I would suggest that they start using R over gnuplot. R is a fully-featured programming language with a very large amount of numerical/statistical/scientific procedures available. (2094 add-on packages currently listed at http://cran.r-project.org/). One wouldn't normally compare R with gnuplot; more appropriate comparisons might be to the scientific libraries for python, perl and C++, and to things like Excel, SAS, and Matlab, Mathematica (although R is not a symbolic mathematics engine). Dan > > > Best regards, > Seb