Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37063989›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2023

Expansion and evolution of the R programming language.

Timothy L Staples

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Timothy L StaplesSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, Building 60, St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8550-2661

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Languages change over time, driven by creation of new words and cultural pressure to optimize communication. Programming languages resemble written language but communicate primarily with computer hardware rather than a human audience. I tested whether there were detectable changes over time in use of R, a mature, open-source programming language used for scientific computing. Across 393 142 GitHub repositories published between 2014 and 2021, I extracted 143 409 288 R functions, programming 'verbs', pairing linguistic and ecological analyses to detect change to diversity and composition of functions used over time. I found the number of R functions in use increased and underwent substantial change, driven primarily by the popularity of the 'tidyverse' collection of community-written extensions. I provide evidence that users can change the nature of programming languages, with patterns that match known processes from natural languages and genetic evolution. In R, there appear to be selective pressures for increased analytic complexity and R functions in decline that are not yet extinct (extinction debts). R's evolution towards the tidyverse may also represent the start of a division into two distinct dialects, which may impact the readability and continuity of analytic and scientific inquiries codified in R, as well as the language's future.

Indexed as

GitHub repositorieslexiconprogramming functionssoftware linguistics

Identifiers

PMID37063989
PMCPMC10090872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.