[Biojava-l] Revised Parser

Matthew Pocock mrp@sanger.ac.uk
Thu, 08 Feb 2001 14:48:04 +0000

Cox, Greg wrote:

> I understand your approach, but my preference is to keep them seperate.  I
> think it keeps the code in the parser more understandable and I think it's
> easier to understand the constructor call when you don't have to look up
> what the boolean flag is.  
> 	That said, I'd like to either get this finished up, or decide to sit
> on it until 1.2.  If merging both parsers is the way to go, I'll do that.  I
> changed GenBank, EMBL, and SwissProt to keep all the parsers consistent.
> 	Greg

Get it all checked in as-is. We can always re-factor after 1.1 and 
before 1.2 - it's too late in the day for beauty to hold up CVS commits.

ps We realy are at the fixes-only stage - does anyone have new code that 
they realy wanted in b4 1.1? Simon - you've checked in the xml stuff, 
no? Mark - happy with the circular classes? Keith - done what needs 
doing to the sequence search API?