Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

create_FDS_pkg should return a subclass of a FacileDataSet #25

Open
lianos opened this issue Sep 26, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

create_FDS_pkg should return a subclass of a FacileDataSet #25

lianos opened this issue Sep 26, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@lianos
Copy link
Collaborator

lianos commented Sep 26, 2018

Firstly: nice job in trying to automate a FacileDataSet data-package creation via the create_FDS_pkg function.

While you have gone through the trouble of implementing this, you might want to go the last mile and have the dataset object that is created from the constructor function you are glue-ing together be a subclass of the FacileDataSet.

Minimally, this will allow the user to then create a dataset-specific facet_frame so it can more easily/transparently be used in TFE's faceted-analyses functionalities.

You might change the end of the function from something like this:

"  FacileDataSet(path, cache_size = cache_size, db.loc = db.loc)",
"}}", .sep = "\n")

To this (untested: I don't really use glue, so might be totally wrong :-)

"out <-  FacileDataSet(path, cache_size = cache_size, db.loc = db.loc)",
"class(out) <- c({FDS_name}, class(out))",
"out"
"}}", .sep = "\n")
@lianos
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lianos commented Sep 26, 2018

Also, is this function supposed to be a Genentech-only function? I ask because:

  1. The @examples code is quite GNE-specific w/ the ep.* stuff (I understand the convenience of putting that there for now); and

  2. This code block:

    mcols(x)$source = "IGIS"
    mcols(x)$feature_type = "entrez"

    it might make sense to make these source and feature_type values you are setting here to be parameters of this function, as I'd imagine most people these days will probably be using "ensembl" feature types.

@phaverty
Copy link

phaverty commented Sep 26, 2018 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants