[Bioperl-l] Bio::SeqFeatureI issues

[Ewan Birney]

On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Hilmar Lapp wrote:

> > > objections, or has anyone thoughts why this may be a bad idea?
> > >
> > 
> > attach_seq() i think is about object creation/modification, and so is
> > implementation specific. Do you think it has to be in the interface?
> 
> It's not object creation really - rather about associating the feature
> with another object. Having this on the interface underscores that in
> general features will live in association with sequences, and here is
> your method to express where it lives. I.e., implementors are encouraged
> to enable this association.
> 
> I think this bias is OK because it reflects 75% or more of use cases.
> Associating a sequence is still optional, so you don't have to call the
> method, and the implementor may choose not do anything useful when
> taking the call, and the SeqFeatureI doc can clearly state this. But I'd
> rather save $feat->can('attach_seq') a million times than not burdening
> an implementor with providing an empty implementation.

I buy this. Go for it.


> 
> 	-hilmar
> 

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