HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
TidierOrg
Tidier.jl
Julia2023–2025
TidierOrg / Tidier.jl

Tidier.jl

Meta-package for data analysis in Julia, modeled after the R tidyverse.

6Distinct people
7Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
606GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Meta-package for data analysis in Julia, modeled after the R tidyverse.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month7 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2023-04-09 15:43:51 UTC to 2025-04-11 10:21:02 UTC.

0122023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 commentsApr 20232023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsApr 20242024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsApr 2025

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Apr 20232023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC202
May 20232023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC202
Jun 20232023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20232023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20232023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20232023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20232023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20232023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20232023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Jan 20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20242024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC110
Mar 20242024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 20242024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20242024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20242024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20242024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20242024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20242024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20242024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20242024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20242024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20252025-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20252025-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-04-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 20252025-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-05-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

7 sources
In my opinion, Julia has the best alternative to dplyr in its Dataframes.jl package [1]. The syntax is slightly more verbose than dplyr because it's more explicit, but in exchange you get data transformations that you can leave for 6 months and when you come back you can read and understand very quickly. When I used R, if I hadn't commented a pipeline properly I would have to focus for a few minutes to understand it. In terms of performance, DF.jl seems to outperform dplyr in benchmarks, but for day to day use I haven't noticed much difference since switching to Julia. There are also APIs built on top of DF.jl, but I prefer using the functions directly. The most promising seems to be Tidier.jl [2] which is a recreation of the Tidyverse in Julia. In Python, Pandas is still the leader, but its API is a mess. I think most data scientists hav
Read the rest
en't used R, and so they don't know what they're missing out on. There was the Redframes project [3] to give Pandas a dplyr-esque API which I liked, but it's not being actively developed. I hope Polars can keep making progress in replacing Pandas, but it's still not quite as good as dplyr or even DF.jl. For plotting, Julia's time to first plot has got a lot better in recent versions, from memory it's something like 20 seconds a few years ago down to 3 seconds now. It'll never be as fast as matplotlib, but if you leave your terminal window open you only pay that price once. I actually think the best thing to come out of Julia recently is AlgebraOfGraphics.jl [4]. To me it's genuinely the biggest improvement to plotting since ggplot which is a high bar. It takes the ggplot concept of layers applied with the + operator and turns it into an equation, where + adds a layer on top of another, and the * operator has the distributive property, so you can write an expression like data * (layer_1 + layer_2) to visualise the same data with two visualisations. It's very powerful, but because it re-uses concepts from maths that you're already familiar with, it doesn't take a lot of brain space compared to other packages I've used. [1] https://dataframes.juliadata.org/ [2] https://github.com/TidierOrg/Tidier.jl [3] https://github.com/maxhumber/redframes [4] https://aog.makie.org/
In Big Book of R
Indeed DataFrames.jl isn't and won't be the fastest way to do many things. It makes a lot of trade offs in performance for flexibility. The columns of the dataframe can be any indexable array, so while most examples use 64-bit floating point numbers, strings, and categorical arrays, the nice thing about DataFrames.jl is that using arbitrary precision floats, pointers to binaries, etc. are all fine inside of a DataFrame without any modification. This is compared to things like the Pandas allowed datatypes (https://pbpython.com/pandas_dtypes.html). I'm quite impressed by the DataFrames.jl developers given how they've kept it dynamic yet seem to have achieved pretty good performance. Most of it is smart use of function barriers to avoid the dynamism in the core algorithms. But from that knowledge it's very clear that systems should be able t
Read the rest
o exist that outperform it even with the same algorithms, in some cases just by tens of nanoseconds but in theory that bump is always there. In the Julia world the one which optimizes to be fully non-dynamic is TypedTables (https://github.com/JuliaData/TypedTables.jl) where all column types are known at compile time, removing the dynamic dispatch overhead. But in Julia the minor performance gain of using TypedTables vs the major flexibility loss is the reason why you pretty much never hear about it. Probably not even worth mentioning but it's a fun tidbit. > For what it's worth, data.table is my favourite to use and I believe it has the nicest ergonomics of the three I spoke about. I would be interested to hear what about the ergonomics of data.table you find useful. if there are some ideas that would be helpful for DataFrames.jl to learn from data.table directly I'd be happy to share it with the devs. Generally when I hear about R people talk about tidyverse. Tidier (https://github.com/TidierOrg/Tidier.jl) is making some big strides in bringing a tidy syntax to Julia and I hear that it has had some rapid adoption and happy users, so there are some ongoing efforts to use the learnings of R API's but I'm not sure if someone is looking directly at the data.table parts.
In Pandas vs. Julia – cheat sheet and comparison

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.