Reflections on RStudio transparency

I would say that the biggest constraint here is time! One of the reasons that StackOverflow, and this community are so valuable to open source is because it "crowdsources" some of the Q&A which (like with so many code-related queries) usually involve some digging around, running code, etc., which, when one has the time is fun to do. But, in a lot of scenarios the fastest answers/suggestions just come from experience.

Again, I don't think anyone is trying to be misleading. AFAICT the independent capabilities of R came up almost immediately:

and I'd chalk @RobertMyles' statement re. View() to benign misunderstanding (again, it's someone trying to help based on their experience — the benefit of the crowd is that you read it, and know that not to be the case — and now everyone does!)

Last week Jim Hester mentioned something to the effect of there being 1207 functions in base! That's a lot of functions— and thank goodness for them, as they make everything else go round. That said, since we (people writing R code) don't typically use dplyr::filter() or stats::filter()-style notation, it's easy to get mixed up based on the context in which you used/learned something.

I'm pro disambiguation, I just think it's a big ask! Also, there's a question of audience— I think the pandoc question is a good example of a case where it is appropriate (and desirable) to differentiate what's going on, but that's not true of every scenario.