4 ms·
It is pretty similar to the Jupiter Notebook experience which is loved by many the modeller, or before that good old Excel. Interactive development has a decen
by djtango 4y ago
It is pretty similar to the Jupiter Notebook experience which is loved by many the modeller, or before that good old Excel.
Interactive development has a decent established history of lowering the bar to entry to computing.
Less familiar with Python, but my impression was that Jupyter notebooks weren't so great for nudging you towards better software engineering practices (when compared to the clojure REPL)?
- wodenokoto 4y agoNotebooks are good for exploring a problem, especially questions about data. I also don't think they are great for "software engineering", but as the name suggest, they are for notes, not applications. When developing something closer to a program, I usually write code line by line in a text editor, but basically every line has been developed in the IPython REPL. Sometimes I write a few cells in Jupyter Notebook to learn an API. It is really nice that you can have the output of a call in cell 1 while working on refining that call in cell 2. Once I feel I've learned what is needed, I move the code into a .py file and turn it into a script or a module. Despite of this workflow, I haven't found a great pairing between editor and IPython REPL and I am manually copy-pasting code between the two. RStudio works really well in this regard, but I think that the editor runs on the same R kernel instance as the program you are developing, which makes restarting R a pain.