Hi. On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:39 PM, David Rosenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you greatly for your help. A couple of additional questions: > 1.) With the affxparser writeCdfxxxxx functions, it looks as though > you are directly writing the binary data of correct endianness rather > than inlining/swig-ing the fusion sdk functions. Am I understanding > this correctly? Does this provide a performance benefit?
The main reason for not utilizing the Fusion SDK library for writing Affymetrix data files is that the Fusion SDK API for writing files is not very mature. I think it was Kasper Hansen that looked into the details and concluded that. At least it wasn't at the time when we decided to provide an API for writing files in affxparser. As the name of the package indicates, James Bullard and Kasper Hansen developed affxparser for the main purpose of supporting an API for reading. At some stage we made the decision to write our own write functions that eventually could be rewrapped on top of Fusion SDK, if wanted. I'm not sure if understand your comment on endianess; I think the binary/XDA CDF file format requires little endian, so there is no option. For continued discussion, please feel free to continue this thread (with cut'n'paste) on the bioc-devel mailing list in order to also reach other affxparser users and developers. Cheers Henrik [snip] > > Thanks again. > > David --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ When reporting problems on aroma.affymetrix, make sure 1) to run the latest version of the package, 2) to report the output of sessionInfo() and traceback(), and 3) to post a complete code example. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "aroma.affymetrix" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/aroma-affymetrix?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
