<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>ranger: A Fast Implementation of Random Forests for High Dimensional Data in C++ and R · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1508.04409/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1508.04409/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>ranger: A Fast Implementation of Random Forests for High Dimensional Data in C++ and R — mentioned by anthony_doan</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22971181</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1508.04409:22971181</guid><pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2020 18:05:34 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; How likely is it that R packages, written by specialists (or grad students) whose main focus is often not programming but some other discipline, in a language full of &amp;quot;quirks,&amp;quot; are going to be really reliable? Do you have the data to back that up or is just a question that you don&amp;#x27;t have an answer to? I think the statement brush off the high quality R packages that already in the ecosystem that is not in anywhere else. The author of element of statistic learning created glmnet package which took python years to even have ported. There are many other packages out there that Python does not…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1508.04409/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>stat.ML</category></item></channel></rss>
