Thanks, I'm quite aware of org-mode. All my emacs config is in it, I have 1000s of LOC configuring /just/ org, I use it my computers and on my phones for any kind of information management, and I absolutely love it.

I think it can be very suitable eg when you are preparing a presentation, report, a paper or a repeatable analysis/process. Especially - as with most of those examples - if you want to interleave narrative and code/results. It is less suitable for doing exploratory analysis, for any kind of interactivity, for connecting to remote sessions (it's possible but clunky), for showing a chart that you can zoom into. For displaying a table with 10,000 rows, for displaying a large plot. Or multiple plots. For being able to zoom into a plot. It's not great at integrating with LSP and similar tools. Could be better at managing code blocks, though one could write additional helpers and bindings fairly easily.

And, finally, it is quite a pain in the ass to have the code stored in a document rather than as code since it does tie me down even to my beloved emacs. I develop most of my code as library code which I can directly import/run. During the development it is still helpful to see the results of running defined functions and to be able to interact with the dataset. I currently do have a solution and a workflow but the tools aren't ideal for it.

I want to be able to have my codebase run inside a docker container, to be able to `git pull` to update it on the remote without involving emacs on the remote end, without having duplicate versions of the code in the repo (ie one in the org document and one tangled) for me to manage, and I also want to be able to make a small change in vim and push it back without involving emacs.

> Juypter has an interface and API built in. What Zasper is the reimplementation of the juypter protocol. You can see this at [1].Juypter kernels are very different from Mathematica notebooks. Mathematica notebooks aren't related to juypter.

Thank you for the explanation. Up until this very moment I thought mathematica and jupyter were exactly the same. Just to make sure, when you say they are very different and unrelated, do you mean like matlab is unrelated to numpy+ecosystem, like how Honda cars are unrelated to Ford cars, or like how pandas is unrelated to excel?

It helps when you are actually familiar with the technologies before making any - especially contradictory - claims. Mathematica for all it's faults - primary of them being proprietary - has a quite finely polished product and jupyter notebook interface draws heavily from it. I'f I'm not mistaken it is the OG notebook interface, though I'm not making a strong claim here.

Mathematica also has an interface and an API built in. You can run mathematica (or is it "wolfram" these days?) code on a headless kernel, you can connect your notebook frontend to a remote kernel, and you can make your own completely independent UI using the APIs in the language. Alternatively, you can connect the notebook interface to a kernel in another language using J/Link MathLink or C/++Link APIs. Or you can embed the mathematica kernel into jupyter - an existing project/duct and run mathematica code in jupyter/Zasper/whatever. Or run it in their webui for the past .. decade at this point?

I'll give you the benefit of doubt and not assume that you are a trollbot but I sincerely don't understand your need to offer "first page of google" suggestions when you clearly don't use the technologies you're commenting on.