feat: centrifuge base #281
Conversation
| "whitelist": { | ||
| # This allows all args that are not in the blacklist if this is the only whitelisted arg | ||
| "*": 0 | ||
| }, | ||
| "blacklist": [ | ||
| "-S", | ||
| "-p", | ||
| "--threads", | ||
| "--un", | ||
| "--al", | ||
| "--un-conc", | ||
| "--al-conc", | ||
| "--un-gz", | ||
| "--un-bz2", | ||
| "--al-gz", | ||
| "--al-bz2", | ||
| "--un-conc-gz", | ||
| "--un-conc-bz2", | ||
| "--al-conc-gz", | ||
| "--al-conc-bz2", | ||
| ] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this config actually reject non-blacklisted args that aren't the first item in tool_args?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, can you give me an example config? (I don't believe so if I'm understanding correctly, but I just want to make sure that I am.)
toolchest_client/files/input_util.py
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ | |||
| """ | |||
| toolchest_client.files.input_util | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree that this is a good point to separate this logic from where it was.
The name (input_util) and logical grouping ("Utilities for handling input files/paths") doesn't make sense to me, though. What functions do we put in here, but not general or another module that pops up for input files or output files?
Would this fit in general, or could this be renamed? Also, should this be unit tested?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done re: the unit test! It's in toolchest_client/files/tests/test_input_params.py.
I agree that the name isn't great. I'd like to refactor it, but I'm still trying to think of a logical name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm going to refactor this into general.py and move on.
|
@lebovic I'm merging this, but I also left replies and made a refactor that would be good to look over. |
2 participants
centrifugetool.prefix_mappingis generated formegahitwith a new module (input_util.py) and function (convert_input_params_to_prefix_mapping). Adds a unit test for the function.