Add a parameter to control whether convertToGFA.py outputs an edge and its dual #20
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
terrific, thanks for the well-documented PR Marco. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi,
this pull request adds a parameter (
-s) to control whether convertToGFA.py outputs an edge and its dual in the GFA file.I'm aware of this discussion and I chose to keep only the canonical edge (as defined by @rrwick) when the
-sparameter is provided.If
-sis not provided the behaviour of the script is the same as before (e.g., it outputs both u+ -> v+ and v- -> u-).This pull request also removes the custom argument parsing and uses argparse instead and adds a main function (hence it looks like the whole file has changed but I actually changed only a few lines).