Thanks you for this Russ, eager to read the book. Of particular interest for me are chapters 3 and 4; mainly in terms of seeing examples of bad code transformed to good and learning the principles that govern solid programming. Thanks for your work on this!
On a completely personal note, I’d be curious to hear your reflections on the way that Jax from Google is designed in terms of how it encourages robust programming practices. Starting with Jax for me was extremely challenging, but learning the requirement on functional purity was very valuable from the point of view of development general programming skills
Thanks Martin! I have never had the time or gumption to take the functional programming plunge. I agree that it can drive good practices for robustness, but I think the lift for most scientists is probably too much.
Thanks you for this Russ, eager to read the book. Of particular interest for me are chapters 3 and 4; mainly in terms of seeing examples of bad code transformed to good and learning the principles that govern solid programming. Thanks for your work on this!
On a completely personal note, I’d be curious to hear your reflections on the way that Jax from Google is designed in terms of how it encourages robust programming practices. Starting with Jax for me was extremely challenging, but learning the requirement on functional purity was very valuable from the point of view of development general programming skills
Thanks Martin! I have never had the time or gumption to take the functional programming plunge. I agree that it can drive good practices for robustness, but I think the lift for most scientists is probably too much.