repost - Re: [Bioperl-l] Huh? Bioperl Seq objects and strands

[Ewan Birney]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Peter van Heusden wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Ewan Birney wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Mark Wilkinson wrote:
> > 
> > > Just to re-post this question as it seems to be either (a) a bug, or (b) an
> > > unusual desire by the person who wrote the parser...
> > 
> > It is a "feature".
> > 
> > > Can *anyone* explain the rationale behind this?  If others agree that the
> > > status-quo is not a "good idea", then can we "fix" it?
> > > 
> > 
> > There is no good idea about this. It is simply a bug. 
> 
> Isn't this the one I was pointing at some months ago? It was related to
> the RangeI.pm code, sub union, which always returns a strand of 0.
> 
> It is fixed on both the head of the CVS tree, and also the branch-06
> branch.

I don't think so - this is probably in the sub seqfeature conversion when
we have a join statement it calls EXPAND but does not set the strand.

> 
> It will be fixed in the bioperl 0.6.2 release, as well, of course.
> 
> Peter
> _______________/\/eGenetics.com\/\_______________
> Peter van Heusden				pvh@egenetics.com
> Electric Genetics
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l@bioperl.org
> http://bioperl.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l
> 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ewan Birney. Mobile: +44 (0)7970 151230, Work: +44 1223 494420
<birney@ebi.ac.uk>. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------