4 ms·
To a software engineer this will also read mad. This article is ultimately explaining why abstraction is good and why it's helpful to build classes in python. T
by toponaut 5y ago
To a software engineer this will also read mad. This article is ultimately explaining why abstraction is good and why it's helpful to build classes in python. That is already obvious to SWEs, not at all specific to "scientific computing", and explained elsewhere much more succinctly.
- d0mine 5y agoI see it more as an example of anti pattern: unnecessary layers obfuscating what happening. Good abstraction is hard and it is not free. It is better to make mistake of under using abstraction than overusing (the latter is much harder to maintain). I would understand if the list comprehension were replaced with the corresponding numpy/scipy/pandas/etc code.
- toponaut 5y agoI agree. I didn't mean to imply this was a good explanation or example. I still think "abstraction/classes are good" was the intention/gist of the article.