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

separate wrapper function #131

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Sep 22, 2020
Merged

separate wrapper function #131

merged 2 commits into from Sep 22, 2020

Conversation

ngreenwald
Copy link
Contributor

This provides a way for us to modify the post-processing params that are sent to the consumer.

Let me know if you think it would be better to have this somewhere else before I start moving forward

Copy link
Contributor

@willgraf willgraf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the consumer itself is still using multiplex_postprocess instead of the new value.

redis_consumer/processing.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@ngreenwald
Copy link
Contributor Author

ngreenwald commented Sep 21, 2020 via email

@ngreenwald
Copy link
Contributor Author

ngreenwald commented Sep 21, 2020 via email

@willgraf
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah I think it makes sense to add all the values here so they're easier to tweak moving forward.

@ngreenwald
Copy link
Contributor Author

Okay, I updated it so there are defaults for all of them.

Currently, the consumer post-processing function doesn't take additional arguments. This doesn't matter right now, since there's no way for users to control any of the post-processing parameters. Eventually, we might want to add that option to the ImageJ app or deepcell.org. When then happens, we'd need to add a way for the base post-processing class to handle additional arguments.

However, since right now this doesn't exist, I set it up so that the 'defaults' are always used.

Copy link
Contributor

@willgraf willgraf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks good, but I'd like to test the consumers out before we merge it.

@ngreenwald
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yup, deepcell.org and ImageJ both gave good looking results

@willgraf willgraf merged commit 68c377f into master Sep 22, 2020
@willgraf willgraf deleted the multiplex_settings branch September 22, 2020 19:08
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants