Nice! That's the Matlab way of doing things. I used to miss the Matlab workflow a lot when I was transitioning from Matlab to python. Although somewhat surprise

Nice! That's the Matlab way of doing things. I used to miss the Matlab workflow a lot when I was transitioning from Matlab to python. Although somewhat surprised they didn't just go with "## title" to match Matlabs' "%% title" (difference is comment character, and "# %%" reads like a python comment of a Matlab cell, I suppose it makes sense if you start with a m-file, python comment the whole thing and then work your way down translating cells from Matlab to numpy/scipy). Personally I've since gone full literate programming mode to the point that I care far more about the narrative and documentation (of methods and results) that I will build and modify tools rather than go back to the Matlab way. I have been looking at Quarto but haven't had the time to see if I can transition my existing (and target/ideal) workflows. I know it gets a lot of hate but ipynb have a lot of advantages as a format for building small custom tools for modification/transformation. Most of the complaints ultimately seem to boil down to not having tools that do what you want. Only want to diff the code cells? That's easy in a python utility that loads the notebook and looks at it intelligently. You can also use pre-commit to modify the notebook and strip out things that don't belong in git. (Also nbdev... exists... and is a good example of how tools can help. Unfortunately it's too tied to GitHub functionality and the developer is a GitHub zealot who is oddly brittle and takes offense and demands justification if anyone mentions not wanting to rely on GitHub)