CreRecombinase

Why not just use a dictionary, or why not just leave the type unannotated? If you really can't (or don't want to) say anything about the type, then don't. Python is dynamically typed!

I turned this on and for most "general" use cases I found it useful, I also observed a downward biased in a family of "quantatitative estimation" tasks, so just remember when you have this kind of stuff turned on (always beware of mutating global state!)

It’s kind of wild how much work really smart people will do to get python to act like Fortran. This is why R is such a great language IMO. Get your data read and arrays in order in dynamic, scheme-like language, then just switch to Fortran and write actual Fortran like an adult.

The comment you linked is a response to my comment where I tried (and failed) to articulate the world in which R is situated. I finally "RTFA" and the benchmark I think perfectly deomonstrates why conversations about R tend not to be very productive. The benchmark is of a hypothetical "sum" function. In R, if you pass a vector of numbers to the sum function, it will call a C function sum. That's it. In R when you want to do lispy tricky metaprogramming stuff you do that in R, when you want stuff to go fast you write C/C++/Rust extensions. These extensions are easy to write in a really performant way because R objects are often thinly wrapped contiguous arrays. I think in other programming language communitues, the existence of library code written in another language is some kind of sign of failure. R programmers just do not see the world that way.

R was heavily inspired by scheme, and I think that's a big part of why it's so popular in the scientific community (it's a great language for authoring DSLs). In fact, DSLs are so good in R that lots of midwit CS bros love to dunk on R the language, not realizing that what they're complaining about is in fact some library function. I like to tell people that R is "scheme on the streets, FORTRAN in the sheets". Just like Clojure deviated from I think R was very much developed as a Lisp designed to facilitate complex and flexible scientific applications (with an emphasis on statistical computing). I think you could develop a compelling analogy that Clojure:JVM::R:Numerics-oriented C/FORTRAN

This is what's so brilliant about the Microsoft "partnership". OpenAI gets the Microsoft enterprise legitimacy, meanwhile Microsoft can build interfaces on top of ChatGPT that they can swap out later for whatever they want when it suits them

QR decomposition isn’t in BLAS, you’re probably thinking of LAPACK.

No. OTOF is the gene symbol. Referring to the gene as otoferlin is perfectly legitimate

That’s certainly not true in scientific computing. For us, dynamic is very much the exception rather than the rule.

How might one go about making the nuclear family a universal?

That’s absolutely not true about Microsoft. They’re very clear about how they use your data. If they’re mining data in secret against their own terms that’s felonious criminal behavior.

I think what it comes down to is that it's very difficult to divorce modeling from inference.

It's absolutely not "on the way out". Lots of very slow moving, very deep pocketed organizations working on very long time horizons are heavily invested in HDF5. The same can't be said for any of the flavor-of-the-week ML "cloud-native" file formats.