Skip to content

Pure functions nitpicking - #249

Draft
mmesiti wants to merge 6 commits into
coderefinery:mainfrom
mmesiti:pure-functions-nitpicking
Draft

mmesiti wants to merge 6 commits into
coderefinery:mainfrom
mmesiti:pure-functions-nitpicking

Conversation

@mmesiti

@mmesiti mmesiti commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Addresses #248

I might have misunderstood the aim of the exercise, but this rephrasing is more familiar to me
(and people coming from my background/culture)

Still Julia, R and Fortran examples to amend.

mmesiti and others added 6 commits September 4, 2026 11:41
Added keypoints about GitHub Actions and CI/CD setup.
Related to first comment in coderefinery#245.
Add lesson description in index as in the git intro
https://coderefinery.github.io/git-intro/
stress automated vs non automated testing
also, add definition of CI
and common meaning of CI
@mmesiti
mmesiti requested a review from bast September 9, 2026 11:51
@mmesiti
mmesiti force-pushed the pure-functions-nitpicking branch from 25e0bb0 to 1ab8dbd Compare September 10, 2026 11:32
@bast

bast commented Sep 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Thanks! This is a clear improvement. Thanks to our discussion I also realized that the example itself is not ideal for what I originally wanted to show: A function that uses a global variable that changes over the course of the computation. What makes the old example not ideal is that max temperature sounds more like a constant than a variable.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants