It depends on where you are in terms of your learning and background. Some people will find value in intuitive blogposts which complement research papers. Other

It depends on where you are in terms of your learning and background. Some people will find value in intuitive blogposts which complement research papers. Others can “grok” this as you say and will find more value in code. Yet others can “grok” the code if only they had the intuitive understanding. You can see where I am getting: everyone has different backgrounds and needs and different articles will appeal to different audiences. There is no one audience to appeal to. On the note of code: this tends to be more subjective than the maths in a paper. There are lots of design decisions that can affect the overall structure of the code. Then there is the trade off between readability and performance. Readable code for blogs is probably not the code you would use in practice. Personally I find it easier to establish the ground truth in the mathematics than to try and figure out the underlying truth from the code. And if you can’t do it yourself, then that’s where the intuitive blogposts help. After that you can choose your own libraries, frameworks, programming design decisions and teachers (including other blogposts) to help you get the code.