On 09/20/2017 09:49 PM, Laurent Gatto wrote:
On 21 September 2017 04:15, Hervé Pagès wrote:
If we want to move export() to BiocGenerics of course import()
would need to follow.
My rough estimate is that this move would possibly break between
20-30 packages or more. The BioC 3.6 release is com
On 21 September 2017 04:15, Hervé Pagès wrote:
> If we want to move export() to BiocGenerics of course import()
> would need to follow.
>
> My rough estimate is that this move would possibly break between
> 20-30 packages or more. The BioC 3.6 release is coming soon and
> it's a bit late to intro
If we want to move export() to BiocGenerics of course import()
would need to follow.
My rough estimate is that this move would possibly break between
20-30 packages or more. The BioC 3.6 release is coming soon and
it's a bit late to introduce such a disruptive change. So I vote
for postponing thi
Out of curiosity, do you also have an import() function?
On 18 September 2017 22:22, Michael Lawrence wrote:
> I was also about to suggest that we converge on export() but held back
> because I was obviously biased. I also agree with making the target
> explicit in the function name. It makes th
Thanks for the suggestions!
Yes, writeMSData was my first go - but we have already a writeMSData
function in mzR. I didn't want to make that a generic and implement it
for the MS data objects in MSnbase, because I thought that calling a
method `writeMSData,MSnExp` on an object the user knows to co
I was also about to suggest that we converge on export() but held back
because I was obviously biased. I also agree with making the target
explicit in the function name. It makes the intent of the code way
more obvious.
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Hervé Pagès wrote:
> Hi jo,
>
> At the momen
Hi jo,
At the moment probably not much to be gained unless you ran into
some conflicts with other "write" methods defined in Bioconductor?
Note that the arguments/signature of base::write() don't really
help making it a clean generic functions (e.g. weird 'file' default,
'ncolumns' and 'sep' arg
Dear all!
We are currently implementing mzML write support in `MSnbase` and did
implement a `write` method for the S4 objects in `MSnbase`. Now, the
question is whether it might not be better to define a `write` S4
generic in `BiocGenerics`?
cheers, jo
