tidytlg
A tables-listings-graphs package that reached CRAN and then went quiet.
Comparison · Analytics
r2rtf vs webmockr
A side-by-side editorial comparison of r2rtf and webmockr — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
r2rtf vs webmockr: at a glance
What is r2rtf?
The clinical-report table engine learned Chinese, then learned to leave RTF entirely
r2rtf builds the RTF tables, listings and figures that go into clinical study reports, and its recent releases have been about widening who and what it can serve rather than changing how tables are composed. The 1.2.0 release added internationalization — a SimSun font path for Chinese characters plus hyphenation control — and 1.3.0 followed with write_docx() and write_html(), turning the LibreOffice conversion the package had documented into exported functions.
What is webmockr?
The stubbing library added httr2 support, then spent a year cutting itself free of everything else
webmockr intercepts HTTP requests in R tests and returns stubbed responses, and since 1.0.0 it covers all three clients that matter — httr, httr2 and crul. The releases through 2025 have been about shedding dependencies: internal R6 classes unexported in 2.1.0, crul demoted from Imports to Suggests in the same release, and the mutual dependency with vcr severed in 2.2.0. The package now installs and runs without pulling in the rest of the rOpenSci HTTP stack.
r2rtf vs webmockr: editorial side-by-side
r2rtf
0.0ANALYTICS
The clinical-report table engine learned Chinese, then learned to leave RTF entirely
◆ Current state
r2rtf builds the RTF tables, listings and figures that go into clinical study reports, and its recent releases have been about widening who and what it can serve rather than changing how tables are composed. The 1.2.0 release added internationalization — a SimSun font path for Chinese characters plus hyphenation control — and 1.3.0 followed with write_docx() and write_html(), turning the LibreOffice conversion the package had documented into exported functions.
◆ Where it's heading
Two threads run through the window. One is output reach: RTF remains the composition target, but the artifacts that come out of it now include DOCX and HTML, and page numbering can be made table-relative across multi-page tables. The other is durability under a moving R and font stack — the ANSI/Unicode converter was rebuilt, the LaTeX mapping table generated from code rather than shipped as sysdata, unlist() usage fixed for R 4.5, and graphics-device leaks that produced stray Rplots.pdf closed off.
◆ Prediction
Having exported DOCX and HTML conversion, the likely next step is filling in what those formats lose relative to RTF — pagination and footnote fidelity are the obvious gaps. The i18n path currently covers Chinese only, so additional font families are the other plausible direction.
webmockr
0.0ANALYTICS
The stubbing library added httr2 support, then spent a year cutting itself free of everything else
◆ Current state
webmockr intercepts HTTP requests in R tests and returns stubbed responses, and since 1.0.0 it covers all three clients that matter — httr, httr2 and crul. The releases through 2025 have been about shedding dependencies: internal R6 classes unexported in 2.1.0, crul demoted from Imports to Suggests in the same release, and the mutual dependency with vcr severed in 2.2.0. The package now installs and runs without pulling in the rest of the rOpenSci HTTP stack.
◆ Where it's heading
Two arcs run in sequence. The first is coverage — multiple queued responses in 0.7.0, basic auth mocking, async through crul, then httr2 — building out what can be stubbed. The second, starting with 2.0.0, is correctness and independence: stubs are now deleted if an error occurs mid-construction rather than lingering half-built, partial matching arrives for bodies and queries, and the dependency graph is pruned release by release. The 2.2.0 split from vcr landed within a minute of crul's release taking mocking control into its own clients.
◆ Prediction
RequestPattern is documented as still exported in 2.1.0 but slated for removal, so the next major release is where that lands. Expect continued dependency pruning rather than new client support — the three clients that exist are already covered.
Alternatives to r2rtf and webmockr
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 r2rtf or webmockr.
Tplyr
Tplyr made clinical summary tables explain where every number came from.
rlistings
Clinical listings that keep inheriting their hardest problem — pagination — from the layer below.
hoardr
A cache-directory helper that has shipped nothing but CRAN-triggered patches for seven years.
gigs
gigs redesigned its whole conversion API for rOpenSci, then spent three releases getting the docs to build.
riem
A weather-data client that keeps rewriting its HTTP layer while slowly tightening its API.
See all r2rtf alternatives → · See all webmockr alternatives →
Recent activity from r2rtf and webmockr
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
- 7mo agor2rtfDOCX and HTML output become exported functions
- 11mo agor2rtfChinese character support arrives via an i18n font path ⚡
- 1y agowebmockrvcr dependency severed
- 1y agowebmockrInternal classes unexported; crul becomes an optional dependency
- 1y agor2rtfText colour fixed for figures encoded into RTF
- 1y agor2rtfFootnote handling fixed for R 4.5.0
- 1y agor2rtfUnicode converter rebuilt and mapping table made inspectable
- 1y agowebmockrFailed stub construction cleans up; partial matching extends to bodies and queries
- 2y agowebmockrhttr2 joins httr and crul as a supported client ⚡
- 2y agor2rtfUTF-8 conversion fix and LibreOffice 7.6 support
- 3y agowebmockrQueued responses, body matching and integer status codes fixed
- 3y agowebmockrRegex URI matching fixed
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between r2rtf and webmockr?
They serve adjacent needs but don't currently overlap on shipped themes. r2rtf and webmockr 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.
Is r2rtf better than webmockr?
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. r2rtf and webmockr 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.
What are the best alternatives to r2rtf?
Top r2rtf alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "r2rtf alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/r2rtf for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
What are the best alternatives to webmockr?
Top webmockr alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "webmockr alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/webmockr for the full list with editorial commentary on each.