John Didion

This issue should move to the wdl-parsers repo if we decide to have the BNF grammar as separate from the spec.

I think I agree. I have found this annoying for a long time and finally decided to try to fix it. But I think the fix is more negative than...

I agree with @rhpvorderman. A primary goal of WDL is readability. Readability is sometimes sacrificed when it is outweighed by the potential benefit, but I don't see that being the...

One thing I might consider is some form of inheritance. For example: ```wdl version development task Super { input { String cmd } command > } task Sub extends Super...

Yes, you'd still need to explicitly call each task with `cmd`, but you wouldn't have to define `cmd` for every task. In the trivial example above it doesn't save much...

Where would those sections go? Would you put them in every task? Or would you put them in the workflow and expect every task to inherit them?

I'll propose yet another option that may be more palatable to everyone. In `development` we have introduce the concept of `hints` (and this may get backported to WDL 1.2 assuming...

For hints, "optional" means the engine doesn't have to do anything with them. If we add runtime access to `runtime` and `hints` then we would have to require that the...

That's a good point - I would expect an error in that case. Maybe we can have `contains_key()` (#305 ) accept either a `Map` or `Object`?

+1 Trying to quantify ~2000 Smart-Seq2 samples. Currently takes about 5 days on a single node doing 1 cell at a time. Perhaps an easier way to implement this would...