[Bioperl-l] treexml
Chris Fields
cjfields at uiuc.edu
Wed Jun 11 21:01:10 UTC 2008
On Jun 11, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Jason Stajich wrote:
> Hey Mira -
>
> Looks like things are going well. I just wanted to check and see if
> it is totally necessary to create new classes or if you can use the
> get/set tag/value pair interface that already exists?
>
> These are the functions that are present in Bio::Tree::TreeI and
> Bio::Tree::NodeI :
> add_tag_value
> remove_tag
> get_all_tags
> get_tag_values
> has_tag
>
> These are the same functions we use in SeqFeatureI interface as
> well. It is just possible to re-use these rather than making a new
> function for every data type - this way we don't have to change the
> interface for different richness of data.
I agree; it simplifies the interface, even if it sacrifices small
conveniences.
> BTW (and this may be me who did it, but maybe Sendu remembers) - I
> am not sure why Bio::Tree::TreeI ISA Bio::Tree::NodeI. Does anyone
> know? Trees are containers around a set of Nodes which are linked
> together to form a tree and the Tree object holds a pointer to the
> root node.
Not sure myself; maybe this was part of Sendu's Taxonomy overhaul a
while back?
> -jason
> --
> Jason Stajich
> Miller Research Fellow
> University of California, Berkeley
> lab: 510.642.8441
> http://pmb.berkeley.edu/~taylor/people/js.html
> http://fungalgenomes.or
-c
Christopher Fields
Postdoctoral Researcher
Lab of Dr. Marie-Claude Hofmann
College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
More information about the Bioperl-l
mailing list