[sja]

I tend to agree with the parent comment. The name of the book sounds like it could be part of a series authored by the same people as “The Pragmatic Programmer”. For me, I subconsciously internalized the grammar of the title as “The Pragmatic Programmer: for ML”.

I have no idea what the expectations are legally, but given the original “pragmatic programmer” book has been out for around for ~25 years and is extremely well known, it seems like a reasonable name collision to avoid.

[graypegg]

The cover of the book has an Addison Wesley logo on it, and the hard cover also has a Pearson logo on it. So that name has some textbook companies backing up PragProg as well.

https://pragprog.com/titles/tpp20/the-pragmatic-programmer-2...

It also DOESN'T have any indication that "The Pragmatic Programmer" is any sort of trademark, so who knows. Either way, IMO calling your own writing "X for Y" where "X" is a commonly known specific work, and "Y" is a generic term, just means that you've diluted your own discoverability into a very big pot.

[rramadass]

Why are we fixated on the name? "A Rose, by any other name, would Smell as Sweet" and all that.

What i am looking for in this submission is insights/opinions from people working in this domain on the topics presented in the book. For example, the book talks about "Concept/Data Drift"; so what is it exactly, how does a ML engineer encounter it in his data and how does he deal with it over time?

[gessha]

Because names mean a lot in and outside software. Try naming it “ML: The Big Nerd Ranch Guide” or use a O’Reilly/No Starch-style cover and you will get a similar reaction.

[aulin]

Because that name is associated with one of the best and successful books about software engineering.

I almost sure that "The Pragmatic Programmer" is a trademark so it comes natural to associate the book with either the same authors or the same publisher as the original book.

[auraham]

X-men reference?