You're doing too much vibe coding and not enough checking/testing.
LinkedIn link on your website points to: https://linkedin.com/in/logannye
Website bio: https://www.logannye.io/about
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.
I'm very bullish on the long-term prospects of Rust in computational biology—as well as research computing more generally.
Note to the OP: specify a focus please? short, long, mega-long read and bacterial, human, small plant or large plant genome? Alignment heuristics and performance differ significantly across those axes.
Seqera Labs has a bit of a manifesto: https://rewrites.bio/
Heng Li has an overview here too: https://lh3.github.io/2026/04/17/the-ai-rewrite-dilemma
IMHO it's... OK? Bioinformatics code quality is generally poor, untrained biologists writing functioning code that is poor in scoping, but works. (Unguided) LLMs write on that level, too, so not much harm done.
Looks like total slop to me. All code in one commit, then a bunch of commits polishing the Readme.
No release, no updates in half a year.
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.
Uhh... are there stochastic genomics pipelines?
Not to say the other names mentioned aren't also deserving of similar honors
The actual team member that took the key photo[0] was Raymond Gosling.
That team didn't interpret the double helix structure of DNA that the photograph had captured - that was Watson and Crick working it out from the photograph.
Fundamentally, she suffered the curse of the experimental scientist - waiting for actual data before being willing to build a model. Watson & Crick postulated ahead based on partial data.
the type of diffraction her lab was doing only makes sense on helical structures. it being helical was already kind of? established -- linus pauling was contemporaneously working on some sort of alpha-helix inspired single helix model.
watson and crick immediately recognized the position of the diffraction spots fit the distances suggested by their chemical modeling of a, t, c, g, which franklin was not able to do since she hadn't made a structural prediction.
> postulated ahead based on partial data
not quite. if you know that a t c and g are the raw chemicals made, you can make a (possibly even literal) model and say, "this ball and stick model predicts diffractions here".
this is arguably better science than waiting for data and fitting a model to the data, falsifiability and all that.
Then you’re one of today’s lucky 10,000. Any time!