[erikgaas]

Been using this for work projects. A lot of raised eyebrows when people hear jupyter first development, but the automated docs, flexibility with prose, inline testing, out of the box pip packaging, and git integration make it well worth it. A bit of a learning curve, but very rewarding.

[smabie]

I've written a lot of jupyter notebooks and honestly, emacs+org-mode is way better. Maybe if jupyter wasn't in a webbrowser, had vim or emacs keybindings, it would be better. Also, I'm not sure the idea of notebooks is even a good idea: it's very easy to get into a inconsistent state and with no textual source of truth it can be very difficult getting back.

Though, thinking about it, the real problem is that when I'm using a real editor (emacs), I feel like a wizard, I know it like the back of my hand and have any number of extensions and libraries I can use. With jupyter, I'm always fighting something and there's no meaningful way to configure it to do what you want. Also, the intellisense sucks. In addition, and maybe this is silly, but I find using a webbrowser to write code to be distasteful.

[ginko]

I'm feeling the same way. I really like the idea of jupyter, but it should be a native application, not something running in a browser. Maybe it's also me not being used to working with notebooks, but I find it strange that I manually have to reevaluate all following cells when I change an earlier one. Shouldn't that just happen automatically?

I dabbled a bit with EIN[1], an emacs client for Jupyter, but it didn't work all that well for me. In particular it didn't work well with my dark color scheme and you still needed to run a jupyter server to connect to.

[1] http://millejoh.github.io/emacs-ipython-notebook/

[JPKab]

Also been using nbdev for work projects in past month. So far, it's been a great productivity boost.

I really, really like the specific aspect of testing with nbdev.

Your docs/examples are your tests. The notebook is a natural environment for scaffolding mocks and other things, without having to use a testing framework over top of the unittest objects.

I'm a long-time user of IDEs, and always will be, but if your metric for producing code is just lines of code, nbdev isn't for you. However, if your metric is producing documented, tested code that is maintainable, it's definitely, for me and my team, a big productivity boost.

[taeric]

Didn't pydoc already have inline testing?

[CGamesPlay]

Sure, but git already had the ability to commit files to it and pip already had the ability to create packages.