geoffjentry
The interplay of nf and groovy (how I wish they hadn’t used groovy!) can be mind bending but if you’re writing your own thkng you have a different optimization model than nf-core that is trying to be one size fits all
You can do this on other systems but it’s nice to have the headache abstracted away for you.
The other major difference is assumption of lifecycle. In most biz domains you don’t have researchers iterating on these things the way you do in bioinf. The newer ML/DS systems do solve this problem than say Aorflow
However all of them were rejections of prior models as well as the workflow solutions prominent in the business space.
As someone who is a software developer in the bioinformatics space (as opposed to the other way around) and have spent over 10 years deep in the weeds of both the bioinformatics workflow engines as well as more standard ones like Airflow - I still would reach for a bioinfx engine for that domain.
But - what I find most exciting is a newer class of workflow tools coming out that appear to bridge the gap, e.g. Dagster. From observation it seems like a case of parallel evolution coming out of the ML/etc world where the research side of the house has similar needs. But either way, I could see this space pulling eyeballs away from the traditional bioinformatics workflow world.
While they've moved away from it in the last few years, the Broad Institute had a huge investment in Scala. It's been in use there since at least 2010 and I believe longer. The primary software department was almost entirely Scala based for several years. That same department had pockets of Clojure as well.
This is an oversimplification but IMO the easiest way of picturing it is instead thinking of defining your graph as a forward moving thing w/ the orchestrator telling things they can be run you shift to defining your graph nodes to know their dependencies and they let the orchestrator know when they're runnable.
People point at pimentoloaf.com or whatever and laugh. But when those companies went under, they took away real dollars from "real" B2B companies. And then when those companies went under, "real" companies who depended on them went under. And so on.
The standard fee is 1 months rent and this is almost always paid by the tenant.
The arguments here tend to cluster into two groups: 1) Laws should be passed that the landlord needs to pay the realtor's fee and not the tenant. 2) It doesn't matter if #1 happens as the landlord would just bake it into the rent anyways.
EDIT: I should say it's not just this reason as what you cite does happen. But it's just de rigueur here regardless of if you're renting the upstairs unit of a homeowner or going through a property management company.
But other people would find the need to correct every typo. And it was painful as crap watching someone with a 5 WPM typing speed and an affinity for typos to get through what they were trying to say. And eventually you move past thinking about a response in real time to screaming "JUST STOP TYPING ALREADY!!!!"
I think it's close to this, but not quite as it's a sliding scale and not a step function.
From a business perspective, there tends to be diminishing returns as one's coding skills improve. And that's the point where returns on communication skills tends to become more important. So more often than not the higher the level the more important communication skills become over coding skills. This is not saying a high level engineer can be all talk and no ability, but rather a great communicator/good coder might become more valuable than a good communicator/great coder.
Apologies for all the hedging in the above. I'm trying to take into account that there are always exceptions to the above. Some positions need that absolute wizard. It's the exception to the rule, but it exists.
I agree that these are Kay's thoughts and also agree with his take on what it should be. But I think the reality is more complicated than it simply being something that evolved away from his grand dream. It's more that there was a soup of ideas floating around during that time that came together as OOP and the combination that became dominant was something else. For instance Simula was already using inheritance prior to Kay's message passing proposal.
It does, but that's because there are different flavors of OOP. Alan Kay's original take on OO was closer to the actor model than what grew into the mainstream spin on OOP with inheritance and the rest.
If you take 10 steps back and squint, microservices & the actor model start to look pretty similar.
"Hi - remind me what time we're meeting" is fine. "Hi" is not :)
As someone who feels that the mini lineup was already getting too large, I'm not a fan of the decision.
[1] https://9to5mac.com/2022/01/25/iphone-14-features-roundup/#h...
From what I've seen of Go, this makes sense to me.
It is why the Reverse Conway is preached. Define your desired architecture, and fit your organization to fit it. At that point your code base will reflect the organization of people working on it, and the output will reflect the desired architecture.
One thing to consider though is that 5 year survival is often used as a measuring stick on treatments in cancer. So events within those 5 years would count against the treatment.
Titles do matter, but only when in the proper context.