"Feel like a programmer" isn't the problem. Knowing that something is technically correct, but being unable to instantly verify that it is aesthetically pleasing is a major hangup. Unless you're making a professional report, or writing a book, there's no benefit to: hand-encoding a text, rendering it, editing the code, re-rendering it, tweaking the code, re-re-rendering it, tweaking the code again, re-re-re-rendering it... ad infinitum. In order for all that work to be worth it, the project must call for absolute perfection.
For a vast majority of writings out there, "good enough" is good enough.
To me, "good enough" goes as follow: I type my text in LaTeX/org/rst/markdow depending on the context (scientific paper, random note, collaborative document, coding-related text) and that's it.
What I say when I learn LaTeX to someone is "LaTeX is there to make your life easy and save time, don't mess with the layout." The result is a nice layout and someone who didn't waste time wysiwyg-ing all the way, which takes a lot of time.
If we want to have actual heroes doing the research that will lead to such prizes, why not give reasonable career path to scientists?
Right now, heroes are first selected by "who is willing to stay in academia despite the working condition", which is not a very interesting criterion in my opinion.
So we're supposed to vouch for a system that will enable unknown yet registration fees and on which we have no control ? There may be solution to the "unique ID" problem but not this one...
Also, should we expect them to be around forever ? We could cope with names until now, we might keep that system for a while.
They don't request that you allow unlimited distribution of the software neither that one can sell it. Examine, compile and run.
It does not sound as scary as you make it sound:-)
Would someone using PDL in practice give examples of where it is used ?
The scientific Python ecosystem has grown so well that I hadn't heard of PDL since a long time.
"The research (abstract) is so controversial that it took over a year to go from submission to publication in Physical Review Letters, rather than the weeks typical of most other papers appearing in the peer-reviewed journal."
This is not that unusual...
Also, it needs to be able to call C and Fortran libraries to be really useful in NumPy. Because no one is going to rewrite all of those numerical libraries.
Emacs Org-Mode. I've learned a little Emacs syntax just to use that package after I've being a Vim user for over 15 years.
A bit more:
Org-mode allows to define text documents with smart headings and lists. You can insert links, equations, store file attached to a heading.
It is cross-platform and you can export your documents to, among other options, html or latex-pdf.
You can flags items as TODO or attribute a "done" time or a "todo" time.
There is http://www.scholarpedia.org/ , a wiki with peer-review that is for now limited to a few domains of physics and neuroscience. It is on invitation only, however.
Slashdot Mirror
"Feel like a programmer" isn't the problem. Knowing that something is technically correct, but being unable to instantly verify that it is aesthetically pleasing is a major hangup. Unless you're making a professional report, or writing a book, there's no benefit to: hand-encoding a text, rendering it, editing the code, re-rendering it, tweaking the code, re-re-rendering it, tweaking the code again, re-re-re-rendering it... ad infinitum. In order for all that work to be worth it, the project must call for absolute perfection.
For a vast majority of writings out there, "good enough" is good enough.
To me, "good enough" goes as follow: I type my text in LaTeX/org/rst/markdow depending on the context (scientific paper, random note, collaborative document, coding-related text) and that's it.
What I say when I learn LaTeX to someone is "LaTeX is there to make your life easy and save time, don't mess with the layout." The result is a nice layout and someone who didn't waste time wysiwyg-ing all the way, which takes a lot of time.
If we want to have actual heroes doing the research that will lead to such prizes, why not give reasonable career path to scientists? Right now, heroes are first selected by "who is willing to stay in academia despite the working condition", which is not a very interesting criterion in my opinion.
You forgot to add the mandatory closing:
e) Profit!
So we're supposed to vouch for a system that will enable unknown yet registration fees and on which we have no control ? There may be solution to the "unique ID" problem but not this one... Also, should we expect them to be around forever ? We could cope with names until now, we might keep that system for a while.
They don't request that you allow unlimited distribution of the software neither that one can sell it. Examine, compile and run. It does not sound as scary as you make it sound :-)
Would someone using PDL in practice give examples of where it is used ? The scientific Python ecosystem has grown so well that I hadn't heard of PDL since a long time.
"The research (abstract) is so controversial that it took over a year to go from submission to publication in Physical Review Letters, rather than the weeks typical of most other papers appearing in the peer-reviewed journal." This is not that unusual...
Felt in Toronto too.
Also, it needs to be able to call C and Fortran libraries to be really useful in NumPy. Because no one is going to rewrite all of those numerical libraries.
It is based on plain text and allows cross linking, references, equations. http://orgmode.org/
Emacs Org-Mode. I've learned a little Emacs syntax just to use that package after I've being a Vim user for over 15 years.
A bit more: Org-mode allows to define text documents with smart headings and lists. You can insert links, equations, store file attached to a heading. It is cross-platform and you can export your documents to, among other options, html or latex-pdf. You can flags items as TODO or attribute a "done" time or a "todo" time.
There is http://www.scholarpedia.org/ , a wiki with peer-review that is for now limited to a few domains of physics and neuroscience. It is on invitation only, however.