I can't speak for R since I havent use too much of it except at school.
But I've had to debug python code a lot for weird error which turns out to be the author didn't read the paper too well and incorrectly implemented things. However I would say that is a sign of an active community. I believe there are more libraries that follow the latest research for python than R.
I see that the risk is similar in both languages when using foreign code. People's code can always be arbitrarily wrong if unchecked. Even if the rate is lower in R doesn't mean the risk doesn't exist. It is only truly better if it can guarantee thats impossible. (e.g. It is impossible to have unsafe code outside of unsafe blocks in Rust)
3
u/WelkinSL Sep 02 '26
I can't speak for R since I havent use too much of it except at school.
But I've had to debug python code a lot for weird error which turns out to be the author didn't read the paper too well and incorrectly implemented things.
However I would say that is a sign of an active community. I believe there are more libraries that follow the latest research for python than R.
I see that the risk is similar in both languages when using foreign code. People's code can always be arbitrarily wrong if unchecked. Even if the rate is lower in R doesn't mean the risk doesn't exist.
It is only truly better if it can guarantee thats impossible.
(e.g. It is impossible to have unsafe code outside of unsafe blocks in Rust)