tidytlg
A tables-listings-graphs package that reached CRAN and then went quiet.
A side-by-side editorial comparison of ijtiff and tern — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
A TIFF reader for scientific imaging that spent its recent releases shedding weight and fixing memory bugs.
ijtiff reads and writes TIFF files the way ImageJ writes them, which ordinary R TIFF readers get wrong — multi-channel, multi-frame, and unusual bit depths. The 3.1.x line is dominated by memory correctness in the C tag-handling layer, alongside dropping the large imager dependency from the display path. Cadence is sporadic, with multi-year gaps.
tern is migrating its entire analysis-function catalogue off make_afun(), one release at a time.
tern builds the clinical-trial tables, listings, and graphs layer on top of rtables — occurrence counts, survival summaries, ANCOVA, incidence rates, subgroup and biomarker tabulations. The visible work across the window is a systematic refactor: dozens of analysis functions rewritten to drop make_afun() and adopt a common analysis-function style driven by rtables' additional_fun_params. Feature additions ride along with it.
ijtiff reads and writes TIFF files the way ImageJ writes them, which ordinary R TIFF readers get wrong — multi-channel, multi-frame, and unusual bit depths. The 3.1.x line is dominated by memory correctness in the C tag-handling layer, alongside dropping the large imager dependency from the display path. Cadence is sporadic, with multi-year gaps.
Two threads run through the window. The C layer is being hardened — memory leaks in tag handling, buffer cleanup, PROTECT errors, validation of malformed files — which is the kind of work that surfaces when a package gets run against real-world files at volume. Separately, the R layer is shedding dependencies, with base graphics replacing imager for display. Both make the package cheaper and safer to depend on rather than more capable.
Expect continued C-level correctness work rather than format features, since three of the last three substantive releases were memory or compiler fixes.
tern builds the clinical-trial tables, listings, and graphs layer on top of rtables — occurrence counts, survival summaries, ANCOVA, incidence rates, subgroup and biomarker tabulations. The visible work across the window is a systematic refactor: dozens of analysis functions rewritten to drop make_afun() and adopt a common analysis-function style driven by rtables' additional_fun_params. Feature additions ride along with it.
This is a multi-release architectural migration, not incremental polish. Each release converts another batch of functions, and the count is large — roughly two dozen in the most recent entry alone, after a comparable batch the release before. Alongside it, the denom parameter is being threaded through counting functions and g_lineplot is accumulating layout control, both patterns of standardising arguments that previously varied per function.
The refactor should continue until the make_afun() dependency is gone entirely, with the remaining tabulate_* and biomarker functions the likely next batch; the entries give no date for completion.
Other Analytics products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either ijtiff or tern.
A tables-listings-graphs package that reached CRAN and then went quiet.
Tplyr made clinical summary tables explain where every number came from.
Clinical listings that keep inheriting their hardest problem — pagination — from the layer below.
A cache-directory helper that has shipped nothing but CRAN-triggered patches for seven years.
gigs redesigned its whole conversion API for rOpenSci, then spent three releases getting the docs to build.
A weather-data client that keeps rewriting its HTTP layer while slowly tightening its API.
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
Both compete on the same themes — r-package — within Analytics. ijtiff and tern are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. ijtiff and tern are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.
Top ijtiff alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "ijtiff alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/ijtiff for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
Top tern alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "tern alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/tern for the full list with editorial commentary on each.