On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 4:36 PM, David Martin (Staff) <[email protected]> wrote: > So in my undergraduate teaching we already use Git (which after a little pain > they get to really enjoy - the easiest way is to make them work on > collaborative projects) but after reading that I will be encouraging the use > of the style guide and pylint (just working out how to use it myself). > > A formal onboarding process (that we can agree on across groups and roll into > teaching) is probably a very good thing. Avoiding Hobgoblins of course.
Having something formal for getting people up to speed sounds like an excellent idea - I don't know of anyone around me who does that. On reflection I found myself wondering how much of this stuff the writer would have learned from working on someone else's well run open-source Python project. My own experience has been that I learn a lot from having my code reviewed, most projects do formal flake8 or similar CI testing, there's a heavy emphasis on unit tests. I've often heard it said that research code doesn't need as much unit testing or code review as scientific code, but it isn't obvious to me that the consequences of error are less in research code. Or better put, it is obvious to me that that is so, but that is not a sign of good health in our publishing system. Cheers, Matthew _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
