[Bioperl-l] Re: Bio::PrimarySeqI

[Hilmar Lapp]

Ewan Birney wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
> 
> > <warning: the following is very technical>
> >
> > I started some cleanup work and cruft busting, beginning with seq
> > classes.
> >
> > Some points about Bio::PrimarySeqI (and possibly others):
> > - Do we still need can_call_new()? First, we can create an object
> > of the same type by ref($self)->new() instead of $self->new().
> > Second, every object can now accept $self->new(). The second may
> > not necessarily be true for implementing classes that do not
> > inherit from RootI, but the first is always true. (Isn't it?)
> 
> We need can-call-new. Some people (who are fronting databases) have
> very thin wrappers over database handles implementing PrimarySeq, and we
> shouldn't (in my view) burden them with having to catch ->new calls in a
> fancy way to handle trunc/revcom etc...
> 

Hmm. Do you mean people may have wrappers that do not implement a
new() method?

If so, I'll have to revert the code in PrimarySeqI ...

	Hilmar
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hilmar Lapp                              email: hlapp@gmx.net
GNF, San Diego, Ca. 92122                phone: +1 858 812 1757
-----------------------------------------------------------------