3 ms·
How much of the BioJulia stuff would you say currently works? It looks like a lot of repos have been created, and the scope is pretty impressive (looks like th
by CreRecombinase 7y ago
How much of the BioJulia stuff would you say currently works? It looks like a lot of repos have been created, and the scope is pretty impressive (looks like there are repos for everything from structural bioinformatics to population genetics), but a lot of them look to be basically empty(https://github.com/BioJulia/PopGen.jl https://github.com/BioJulia/PopGen.jl), or have really scary looking issues:(e.g https://github.com/BioJulia/GeneticVariation.jl/issues/25 https://github.com/BioJulia/GeneticVariation.jl/issues/25).
- improbable22 7y agoNot my field, but at least some of it appears to be worked on seriously. This was an interesting recent blog post about making DNA-sequence processing go fast: https://biojulia.net/post/seq-lang/ https://biojulia.net/post/seq-lang/
- kescobo 7y ago% of the repos in the org on github? That number is lower than I'd like. % of the repos that are actively maintained? Much higher. One of the great things about julia is that it's really easy to throw together a package and register it. One of the bad things about julia is how easy it is for those one-off projects or idea dumps to pollute the space. We could definitely do a better job labeling the repos that are no longer being maintained or that aren't actually ready for prime time. There's a tradition in julia of a lot of really functional libraries to stay < v1.0, because we all take semver seriously, and if the interface is still in a bit of flux, making the switch to 1.0 is a big deal (DataFrames.jl, looking at you). But it does make it hard for new users to distinguish between a super robust package and someone's weekend hobby.