programming languages

Rank

Mathematica vs R

  1. This language excels at symbolic manipulation

    100%
  2. Code written in this language will usually run in all the major implementations if it runs in one of them.

    100%
  3. This language is very flexible

    88% 12%
  4. This language matches it's problem domain particularly well.

    88% 12%
  5. This language is built on a small core of orthogonal features

    85% 15%
  6. Libraries in this language tend to be well documented.

    81% 19%
  7. This language is well documented

    81% 19%
  8. This language has a very coherent design

    80% 20%
    Mathematica 12 out of 15 picked Mathematica over R R
  9. If my code in this language successfully compiles, there is a good chance my code is correct.

    80% 20%
  10. I still discover new features of this language on a fairly regular basis

    80% 20%
  11. I often feel like I am not smart enough to write this language

    77% 23%
  12. I learned this language early in my career as a programmer

    76% 24%
    Mathematica 10 out of 13 picked Mathematica over R R
  13. This language would be good for teaching children to write software

    75% 25%
  14. This language is easier to use for it's problem domain by removing unneeded expressiveness (such as not being Turing complete).

    75% 25%
  15. I usually use this language on solo projects

    75% 25%
  16. I rarely have difficulty abstracting patterns I find in my code

    75% 25%
  17. There are many good commercial tools for this language

    72% 28%
  18. This language is minimal

    72% 28%
  19. The resources for learning this language are of high quality

    71% 29%
  20. This is a high level language

    71% 29%
  21. Programs written in this language will usually work in future versions of the language

    71% 29%
  22. It is easy to debug programs written in this language when it goes wrong

    71% 29%
  23. This language has a high quality implementation

    70% 30%
  24. This language has well-organized libraries with consistent, carefully thought-out interfaces

    70% 30%
  25. Programs written in this language tend to play well with others

    66% 34%
  26. This language has unusual features that I often miss when using other languages

    66% 34%
  27. Programs written in this language tend to be efficient

    66% 34%
  28. I am reluctant to admit to knowing this language

    66% 34%
  29. The semantics of this language are much different than other languages I know.

    66% 34%
    Mathematica 10 out of 15 picked Mathematica over R R
  30. It is easy to tell at a glance what code in this language does

    66% 34%
  31. This language excels at concurrency

    66% 34%
  32. I enjoy playing with this language but would never use it for "real code"

    66% 34%
  33. This language is good for beginners

    64% 36%
  34. This language allows me to write programs where I know exactly what they are doing under the hood

    60% 40%
  35. Code written in this language is very readable

    60% 40%
  36. I enjoy using this language

    60% 40%
  37. I find it easy to write efficient code in this language

    60% 40%
  38. The thought that I may still be using this language in twenty years time fills me with dread

    60% 40%
  39. There is a lot of accidental complexity when writing code in this language

    60% 40%
  40. I find this language easy to prototype in

    60% 40%
  41. Code written in this language tends to be very reliable

    60% 40%
  42. This language has many features which feel "tacked on"

    58% 42%
  43. It is too easy to write code in this language that looks like it does one thing but actually does something else

    58% 42%
  44. Code written in this language tends to be terse

    57% 43%
  45. This language is expressive

    57% 43%
  46. Learning this language improved my ability as a programmer

    57% 43%
  47. This language has a very rigid idea of how things should be done

    55% 45%
  48. Learning this language significantly changed how I use other languages.

    55% 45%
  49. I would recommend most programmers learn this language, regardless of whether they have a specific need for it

    55% 45%
  50. I can imagine this will be a popular language in twenty years time

    54% 46%
  51. I would use this language for a web project

    54% 46%
  52. This language has an annoying syntax

    53% 47%
  53. I would like to write more of this language than I currently do

    53% 47%
  54. This language is good for numeric computing

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 6 out of 12 each for R and Mathematica R
  55. I usually use this language on projects with many other members

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 4 out of 8 each for R and Mathematica R
  56. This language has a very dogmatic community

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 4 out of 8 each for R and Mathematica R
  57. This language encourages writing code that is easy to maintain.

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 6 out of 12 each for R and Mathematica R
  58. This language has a niche in which it is great

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 5 out of 10 each for R and Mathematica R
  59. This language excels at text processing

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 4 out of 8 each for R and Mathematica R
  60. Writing code in this language is a lot of work

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 5 out of 10 each for R and Mathematica R
  61. When I write code in this language I can be very sure it is correct

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 5 out of 10 each for R and Mathematica R
  62. This language has a niche outside of which I would not use it

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 7 out of 14 each for R and Mathematica R
  63. This language is well suited for an agile development approach using short iterations.

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 6 out of 12 each for R and Mathematica R
  64. This language encourages writing reusable code.

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 4 out of 8 each for R and Mathematica R
  65. I would use this language as a scripting language embedded inside a larger application

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 4 out of 8 each for R and Mathematica R
  66. I find code written in this language very elegant

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 6 out of 12 each for R and Mathematica R
  67. It's unusual for me to discover unfamiliar features

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 3 out of 6 each for R and Mathematica R
  68. I often get angry when writing code in this language

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 6 out of 12 each for R and Mathematica R
  69. I would use this language for writing server programs

    50% 50%
    Mathematica 4 out of 8 each for R and Mathematica R
  70. If this language didn't exist, I would have trouble finding a satisfactory replacement

    46% 54%
  71. This language is likely to be around for a very long time

    46% 54%
  72. I can imagine using this language in my day job

    45% 55%
  73. This language is good for distributed computing

    45% 55%
  74. This language is best for very small projects

    44% 56%
  75. This language is suitable for real-time applications

    44% 56%
  76. This language is best for very large projects

    44% 56%
  77. This language is unusually bad for beginners

    44% 56%
  78. I would use this language for casual scripting

    44% 56%
  79. I know this language well

    43% 57%
    Mathematica 74 out of 132 picked R over Mathematica R
  80. I use this language out of choice

    42% 58%
  81. This language is large

    42% 58%
  82. This language is good for scientific computing

    42% 58%
  83. This language is likely to have a strong influence on future languages

    40% 60%
  84. This language has a wide variety of agreed-upon conventions, which are generally adhered to reasonably well, and which increase my productivity

    40% 60%
  85. I would use this language for mobile applications

    40% 60%
  86. I would use this language to write a command-line app

    40% 60%
  87. Code written in this language tends to be verbose

    40% 60%
  88. I know many other people who use this language

    37% 63%
  89. I am sometimes embarrassed to admit to my peers that I know this language

    37% 63%
  90. I often write things in this language with the intent of rewriting them in something else later

    37% 63%
  91. I would use this language for writing programs for an embedded hardware platform

    37% 63%
  92. I use many applications written in this language

    36% 64%
  93. This language is likely to be a passing fad

    36% 64%
  94. I would list this language on my resume

    33% 67%
  95. This is a mainstream language

    31% 69%
    Mathematica 11 out of 16 picked R over Mathematica R
  96. I would use this language for a desktop GUI project

    30% 70%
  97. This language is frequently used for applications it isn't suitable for

    30% 70%
  98. Third-party libraries are readily available, well-documented, and of high quality

    28% 72%
  99. This language has a strong static type system

    28% 72%
  100. Developers who primarily use this language often burn out after a few years

    28% 72%
  101. I regularly use this language

    27% 73%
  102. When I run into problems my colleagues can provide me with immediate help with this language

    25% 75%
  103. This language has a good library distribution mechanism.

    25% 75%
  104. There are many good open-source tools for this language

    25% 75%
  105. There is a wide variety of open source code written in this language

    23% 77%
    Mathematica 10 out of 13 picked R over Mathematica R
  106. This language has a good community

    22% 78%
  107. I use a lot of code written in this language which I really don't want to have to make changes to

    19% 81%
  108. This language makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot

    18% 82%
  109. There are many good tools for this language

    16% 84%
    Mathematica 10 out of 12 picked R over Mathematica R
  110. This is a low level language

    14% 86%

What's going on here?

The absolute rankings are interesting for large scale comparisons but when you want to know about two specific languages it's much more informative to look at how the two fare when they go directly head to head.

Here are all the statements which we've got enough comparisons between Mathematica and R to be meaningful and which of the two our users picked.

The order in which we're presenting them is a little arbitrary (sorry), but we've tried to put the things which they're both good at first so as to give you the most interesting picture of it.