Generate GUIs and deploy bioinformatics workflows with python

• latch

  2 156 9.8 Python

  a python bioinformatics framework

  

here is the repository with the MIT license for the community to refer to - https://github.com/latchbio/latch

• bulk-rnaseq

  2 32 4.8 Python

  Bulk RNA-seq analysis.

  

Here is the link if you want too look yourself: https://github.com/latch-verified/bulk-rnaseq/releases/tag/v0.0.317

• InfluxDB

  www.influxdata.com sponsored

  Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale. Get real-time insights from all types of time series data with InfluxDB. Ingest, query, and analyze billions of data points in real-time with unbounded cardinality.

  

• rnaseq

  14 770 9.5 Nextflow

  RNA sequencing analysis pipeline using STAR, RSEM, HISAT2 or Salmon with gene/isoform counts and extensive quality control.

  

First lets recognize that the framework presented has new features that don't exist in the previous DSLs you mention. Many developers highly value these additions and they along could justify a new stab at a workflow language: and for many the represent tradeoff * Interface generation * Declarative cloud resource provisionment * Static typing * Native python support This workflow has a similar level of complexity to nf-core/rnaseq (not the same, but similar in number of constituent tasks for the purpose of counting transcript abundance). It ingests raw sequencing reads, runs QC + trimming, does psuedo-alignment, recovers counts from abundance estimates, and aggregates counts over a many samples for direct use by diff-exp tools. (It is not 'running salmon'. I think that is a reductionist take.) It does this in addition to dynamically building React.js interfaces, adding static type validation to input parameters, and deploying cloud infrastructure in a simpler way. For the lines of code comparison, I think it is a weird way to compare software as the number of lines of code is no proxy for legibility, ease of development, likelihood of long-term maintenance (many more people know python than nextflow). Nonetheless nf-core/rnaseq has nearly 1000 lines alone in its workflow entrypoint alone - https://github.com/nf-core/rnaseq/blob/master/workflows/rnaseq.nf . With imported modules + subworkflows, LOC actually reaches the many thousands.. (Now I understand it is more complex and mature, but I highlight why I think the comparison is weird and wonder what you are even comparing to.) Whereas the entire logic of the presented pipeline is actually neatly encapsulated in 1200 lines of a single file. Overall this feels like a that doesn't come from a place of rational discourse, rather group dislike for something new and different. What I would like to do is address and talk about specific technical points (preferably over issues on github) so conversations can be productive and improve the tools I am working on.

Suggest a related project