9 comments

  • p4ul 3 hours ago
    This is interesting; thanks for sharing! I have been curious about the adoption of Rust in computational biology. I know that the folks at Saint Jude's [1] are also using Rust for their 'omics research.

    [1] https://github.com/stjude-rust-labs

    • the__alchemist 1 hour ago
      I'm building a structural bio crate system in rust (na_seq, bio_files, bio_apis, dynamics and some more specialized). No one is using it AFAIK other than myself. I am using it to build a GUI multi-purpose structural bio GUI program called Molchanica.

      Note that this doesn't have much overlap with the traditional bioinformatics workflows like the OP (Rosland), or the one you linked to seem to be focused on.

    • clmcleod 30 minutes ago
      Thanks for the shout out!
  • boron1006 1 hour ago
    Lots of bad smells in this repo.
    • the__alchemist 58 minutes ago
      Do you have some examples to look at? I am curious.
      • boron1006 14 minutes ago
        Well the √t stuff looks like nonsense or way overblown, existing tools already do similar things, there’s pretty much a single commit with no follow up commits etc etc.
  • Rijanhastwoears 1 hour ago
    > A deterministic genomics engine with a compact memory footprint.

    Uhh... are there stochastic genomics pipelines?

  • shauniel 2 hours ago
    I would love to hear about what the sacrifices are, but this project really looks amazing.
  • semiinfinitely 1 hour ago
    bioinformaticians have been making these useless bioinformatic-toolkit-in-my-favorite-programming-language repos for years
    • maxall4 1 hour ago
      Well, what else are we going to do while waiting for the bench scientists to finish collecting data?
    • gilleain 1 hour ago
      Hate to agree, but it is true. For a while, I think, the main sequencing framework was in perl (Bioperl). Not sure what was best for structures - possibly Biojava?

      It is very tempting, though - 'just' make a nice, clean API in your favourite language (eg Haskell, Ruby, ...) and everyone will flock to use it! Maybe.

  • bonsai_spool 1 hour ago
    Didn't see a publication or preprint for this - is there one?
  • vatsachak 45 minutes ago
    Looking at the commenting pattern, it seems like AI unfortunately
    • jghn 41 minutes ago
      The OP? They're not AI, they've been active on X and bsky for years.
  • peterfirefly 2 hours ago
    Should have called it Raymond.
    • flobosg 2 hours ago
      • cmpb 2 hours ago
        I'm not familiar with Margaret Oakley Dayhoff, but I am aware that Rosalind Franklin [1] was extremely important for our understanding of DNA, comparable to Watson/Crick, with whom she co-discovered the structure of DNA. So it seems "Rosalind" is at least very appropriate as a name for a genomics tool such as this.

        Not to say the other names mentioned aren't also deserving of similar honors

        [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

        • flobosg 1 hour ago
          > I'm not familiar with Margaret Oakley Dayhoff

          Then you’re one of today’s lucky 10,000. Any time!

  • qzgrid37 2 hours ago
    [dead]