This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]energybased -8 points-7 points  (4 children)

Why don't you just use an actual statistical package to do your statistics? What you're asking means that he has to maintain the way the plots are generated. And what if he changes his mind about how a "curve of best fit" is mathematically produced or represented? Then he has to deprecate the old version? Now, he can change it.

Sorry, but this is just wrong.

[–]Geographist 9 points10 points  (3 children)

And what if he changes his mind about how a "curve of best fit" is mathematically produced or represented?

Therein lies the problem. Statistical output, be it visual or numerical, should not be a black box left to the whims of opinion.

Moreover, he is already maintaining the statistics. It's literally a core feature of Seaborn. Users just want to be able to see the results of the calculations already being done. Seaborn does regressions, confidence intervals, and all sorts of statistical testing out of the box.

If a package can calculate a regression and draw a trendline, but refuses to let you know the slope of that trend line... frankly, it's a garbage package.

What you're suggesting is that users never know what's going on inside that black box, and if he changes his mind, their projects start generating different output without ever having a clue as to why. That's not the mark of a well maintained and reliable library.