The examples section of every base-R function's help page are just the WORST. #rstats
For example: https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/base/versions/3.6.2/topics/switch
@capbri I respectfully disagree, they have their own style that **now** I like.
I think the public they targeted long time ago is not the same anymore.
I am hoping that great project like this: https://ropensci.org/blog/2024/07/09/multilingual-documentation-wg/
can be used to add different flavors on help page.
@defuneste I hear you. My big gripe with base-R help (and the help in many packages) is that they create abstract, toy datasets to explain features (columns “A”, “B”, “C”; rows 1, 2, 3). Base-R has plenty of built-in datasets of concrete case examples. Why aren't we using *actual* data in examples, instead of confusing abstract toy examples? If I'm looking for help, the *last* thing I want is abstract data I can't make sense of being used to demonstrate a function I can't make sense of. #rstats
@defuneste Also, this complaint isn't restricted to R. I have the same gripe about #pandas in #python. The base pandas examples—unless they've drastically changed—often use toy datasets that are *super* confusing. In the case of pandas, I'm not sure whether it ships with concrete datasets. But, like, base-R has chickwts, mtcars, etc. Almost any of those—rather than toy datasets—can be the basis for showing the user how to do complex manipulations/use base-R functions.
