Hello,

I don't think I have seen it shared on this list, so here you go:
http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v11/n5/pdf/nphys3313.pdf

I'm not too fond of the paper per se, it seems too vague and too
detailed at the same time.  I stopped reading half-way because it was
painful, then cruised to the end... to see (well, to make sure) that
SWC was cited (it is).

Strangely enough, they write ‘software carpentry’ and
software-carpentry (not Software Carpentry, anyway).

Cheers,
Marianne

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org

Reply via email to