[biosqueak] The extent of BioSqueak?

Bruce ONeel beoneel at bluewin.ch
Thu May 9 10:54:32 UTC 2002


"Richard A. O'Keefe" <ok at cs.otago.ac.nz> wrote:
> Aaron J Reichow <reic0024 at d.umn.edu> wrote about BioSqueaking:

> 
> 	Consequently, all the Bio* libraries only deal with this rapidly
> 	growing, but exclusive part of biology.
> 	
> I think that part of the reason is that studying genes and proteins leads
> to huge databases full of very long sequences; algorithms for processing
> these things form a coherent subdiscipline of computer science.  (Which I
> am beating my brains out trying to get my head around.  Oodles of books that
> tell you how to run program Foo, papers scattered all over the library that
> are original sources, very very few books that clearly explain how the
> darned things *work*.)

You probably already know this, but 

Algorithms on Strings, Trees, andSequences by Gusfield seems good.
Also, thouh I've not held it in my hands, Data mining for Scientific
and Engineering Applications with Grossman (ED) looks helpful 
as well.


> Squeak's Squeak.  I can't imagine anything interesting being turned away.
> I can't imagine it working in the next release but one either, but that's
> another story.


I second the first part, I'd be happier if the second part wasn't so
true :-)

cheers

bruce



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list