Thank you for this thoughtful comment on the language we are using. I have been thinking about this in terms of "check your work". This is a core competency for problem solving, and what I want SWC to add is the idea that in computational research we can and should check our work automatically.
--Abie Abraham D. Flaxman Assistant Professor Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation | University of Washington 2301 5th Avenue, Suite 600 | Seattle, WA 98121| USA Tel: +1-206-897-2802 | Mobile: +1-412-726-0401 | Fax: +1-206-897-2899 UW | Campus Mailbox: 358210 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> | http://healthmetricsandevaluation.org<http://healthmetricsandevaluation.org/>| http://healthyalgorithms.com From: Discuss [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pauline Barmby Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 10:58 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Discuss] Defensive Programming with R Dear all - I think "sanity check" could be considered an ableist term, equating "insane" with "bad". Can I suggest that "expectation check" would be better and also more descriptive? Pauline --- Pauline Barmby Associate Dean, Graduate and Post Doctoral Studies, Faculty of Science Associate Professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy Western University [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 519-661-2111 ext 81557
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss
