On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 1:25:57 PM UTC-4, Isaiah wrote: > > If the work is "I translated Conventional Algorithm Foo into Julia" then >> it probably wouldn't be that interesting > > > There have been some pushes to create a peer-reviewed publication path for > software that is not necessarily scientifically novel. I'm not familiar > with any in computational physics, >
Computer Physics Communications (http://www.journals.elsevier.com/computer-physics-communications/) publishes a lot of articles of this sort: papers that are more intended to document free/open-source implementations than they are to describe novel algorithms. This is quite useful as a way to give people something to cite when they use your code, and also to obtain more traditional academic credit for free-software work.
