| I am a professional coder and my eyes glaze over with assembly. Still, I don't think there's that much assembly. What I saw was to show how the code is implemented, with very little about "doing assembly" outside of a simple example. I can't judge background - I don't have a sense of who uses Julia, and I've been programming for too long, without exposure to the target audience. Since you mentioned "academic setting", I'll point out there are also scientists-who-program in industrial settings. However, none of the ones I know about use Julia. My belief is that most scientists-who-program aren't going to read text books from other fields. They are under pressure to produce NOW, and don't think it's worth the time to acquire an entirely new mindset. Instead, I think this sort of knowledge transfer is by jerks and fits, as someone figures out an optimization, and passes it along, with domain-specific context that makes it easier for others in the field to understand. Which means, like you, I don't think this notebook will be all that useful, though in my case that's because I think it's too generic. > what percentage of them understood the entire article I don't think that's a telling metric. Only some scientific coders are interested in writing fast code (vs. fast-enough code), and only some of those use Julia. |