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

Add function to test if UpdatePropertyCache is necessary #400

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 19, 2014

Conversation

NadineSchneider
Copy link
Contributor

Add a function to test if calling UpdatePropertyCache is necessary. Introduce this function to the MolBlockWriter to prevent getting an exception when working with not sanitized molecules.

@@ -369,6 +369,9 @@ struct mol_wrapper {
(python::arg("self"),python::arg("strict")=true),
"Regenerates computed properties like implicit valence and ring information.\n\n")

.def("NeedsUpdatePropertyCache", &ROMol::needsUpdatePropertyCache,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't this method also be available on Atoms?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I haven't found a UpdatePropertyCache for atoms in Python, therefore I didn't added it. I will provide an update.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ups, I have found it now 😁

greglandrum added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2014
Add function to test if UpdatePropertyCache is necessary
@greglandrum greglandrum merged commit 85b6b9c into rdkit:master Dec 19, 2014
@greglandrum greglandrum added this to the 2015_03_1 milestone Mar 21, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants