[BiO BB] Please guide me

[Andrius]

Michael Gruenberger wrote:

>On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 15:20, Andrius wrote:
>
>  
>
>>i'm sure real world will demand it. it's kind of a feeling when you 
>>doing research with such tools..it
>>reminds me open source climate a lot. the thing is... sometimes even 
>>programmers do not think in a real way.
>>they tend to follow 'practices' and there's little few who follows their 
>>brain. you may disagree and of course i can ask:
>>does our today 'market' demand thinking? same for research i think. as 
>>long as researchers demand tools which
>>allow them to think free ( and gain better results this way ) there's a 
>>market for such tools. of course it may not be mainstream,
>>but there's nothing wrong with that. i'm not much familiar with research 
>>routines (i'm still graduating for bachelor) and people in it, but i 
>>have few friends there. they tend to say that even in academic world 
>>there's a lot of serial writing (i mean writing papers just to increase 
>>curriculum) and there's no surprise such people do not demand open 
>>thinking tools. and there's nothing wrong with that again:) as long as 
>>there's bunch of people who care about a quality of their work (research).
>>    
>>
>
>Yes, you are right, researchers need (computer) tools, but they need to
>be very easy to use and a new programming language would also have to be
>very easy to use. What would your bio-language look like? What would
>make it easier to use than existing BioJava or BioPerl? Bioinformatics
>is a very wide field (I work on two projects at the moment, one is
>mainly database stuff, the other one 3D images). What would your
>language focus on? 
>
>Michael.
>  
>
but perhaps you're right. biojava makes huge sense. just the fact that 
plain java is used makes
a bit unconfortable for a researcher to come up quickly. but no 
alternative for now.