The perfect Middle Way between command-line interfaces and GUIs. A thing of great beauty.

Things to do:

Includes:

The exact relationships between those clades is not very clear as there's a bunch of extinct species in the middle we are not sure exactly where they go exactly, some hypothesis are listed at: en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tetrapod&oldid=1053601110#Temnospondyl_hypothesis_(TH)

But at least it seems rock solid that those three are actually clades.

This is a good approach. The downside is that while you are developing the implementation and testing interactively you might notice that the requirements are wrong, and then the tests have to change.

One intermediate approach Ciro Santilli likes is to do the implementation and be happy with interactive usage, then create the test, make it pass, then remove the code that would make it pass, and see it fail. This does have a risk that you will forget to test something, but Ciro finds it is a worth it generally. Unless it really is one of those features that you are unable to develop without an automated test, generally more "logical/mathematical" stuff. This is a sort of laziness Driven Development.

Bibliography:

This notation is so confusing! People often don't manage to explain the intuition behind it, why this is an useful notation. When you see Indian university entry exam level memorization classes about this, it makes you want to cry.

The key reason why term symbols matter are Hund's rules, which allow us to predict with some accuracy which electron configurations of those states has more energy than the other.

web.chem.ucsb.edu/~devries/chem218/Term%20symbols.pdf puts it well: electron configuration notation is not specific enough, as each such notation e.g. 1s2 2s2 2p2 contains several options of spins and z angular momentum. And those affect energy.

This is why those symbols are often used when talking about energy differences: they specify more precisely which levels you are talking about.

Basically, each term symbol appears to represent a group of possible electron configurations with a given quantum angular momentum.

We first fix the energy level by saying at which orbital each electron can be (hyperfine structure is ignored). It doesn't even have to be the ground state: we can make some electrons excited at will.

The best thing to learn this is likely to draw out all the possible configurations explicitly, and then understand what is the term symbol for each possible configuration, see e.g. term symbols for carbon ground state.

It also confusing how uppercase letters S, P and D are used, when they do not refer to orbitals s, p and d, but rather to states which have the same angular momentum as individual electrons in those states.

It is also very confusing how extremelly close it looks to spectroscopic notation!

The form of the term symbol is:

The $2S+1$ can be understood directly as the degeneracy, how many configurations we have in that state.

Bibliography: