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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
FastK: adding new tool #5550
FastK: adding new tool #5550
Changes from 14 commits
81b4e81
acbf696
c0ca84c
73911c5
7b9270f
40db534
1530579
59ef44c
a553432
371c28f
1f2cfc5
74d75a4
0cceb90
3628496
905b1e2
b682572
ad04760
e0663ab
08d8320
82dfa9c
97887e8
ba42b65
e5b0606
30912b3
f6bafef
2977741
cada3fa
e25160e
af3c940
d6f1382
6a717f2
ea44af0
a2eb1a5
5dc3e37
5ede1b7
8ea1904
6cfbf27
83f1327
94d876c
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess you can also run without creating
outfiles
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i think the
outfiles
dir makes tar'ing the files down the line easier, because i justtar -c -f fastk.tar ./outfiles/
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Infile can be also other formats than fasta.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
true, that was my short-sightedness from just using this with FASTAs, will add the other supported formats as described in the program's readme 👍 thank you!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok so what i am trying to figure out now is, the program seems to decide how to run based on the given file extension, so i gzipped the test data to try to make it smaller, and then i had to change the CMD to
fasta.gz
so that it would properly run on that. i'm going to mark this PR as draft for nowThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you set
ftype="fasta" in the test's
` it should be extracted automatically.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Still wondering: What is the use of this tools if the user selects
No
? The tool will only produce a tar, which can't be used in Galaxy, isn't it?Instead of yes/no, shouldn't the user select from at least one of the tools fastk provides:
If you agree, but don't have the time or need for all of them then maybe prepare the tool such that it can be easily extended in this way?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i agree with that structure for how to run the tool! i think i tried to do that when i initially was making the skeleton for the tool:
https://github.com/abueg/tools-iuc/blob/73911c5e8a5b5e33f2ca70c253bdf7f7868e7eba/tools/fastk/fastk.xml
... but it got lost in the edits along the way. but would that sort of structure work for this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
would i put a placeholder in the other option
elif
s? or just havefastk
andtabex
implemented?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@bernt-matthias each of the sub-tools for fastk use the fastk tar as an input. The original intention was to have this be a suite where you would run fastk and the output file would be useable by any of the other tools without needing to rerun fastk itself. We can add a separate output for the .hist files aside from the tar file, but the intent was to standardize an input for the histex, tabex, etc. tools to use
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1 for the sub-tools idea, i.e. one for
Fastk
, one forHistex
, ...There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of this, maybe:
Plus the necessary change in the command section (ie check if a value is given).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Several of the subsequent tools take an input that ran without the sorted table cutoff flag, which is why we made it optional
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's still optional. But the conditional is not needed for this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe a collection would be better than a tar?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the output files won't be needed/used on their own, only ever as a folder with those files inside them, so that was the rationale for tar
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I understand. But then we have one optional output
tabex_hist
and one output that "won't be needed/used ...". So what is supposed to be used as output?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
oh, sorry about the confusion -- when k-mer counting, there should always be an output of the
output.hist
file. optionally, if the user specifies the-k
option, then the outputs will includeoutput.ktab
and a number of hidden.output.ktab.n
files, withn
corresponding to the number of threads given to the run. these hidden files are needed to be in the same folder as the non-hiddenoutput.ktab
file in order for subsequent commands (e.g.,tabex
orhistex
) to work.so to sum, there will always be at
output.hist
as an output, and optionally other outputs (.output.ktab.n
files) that might be produced, and can't be used on their ownThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Still I don't see if there is always an output of the Galaxy tool that can be used (within Galaxy).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
there should always be a
output.hist
file, that is a binary file that can be viewed via runningHistex
... so i suppose no, there is not always a readily useable output that can be put into other tools, it needs to be processed with another tool in this suite, firstThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ah i need to change this because i added the
operation_type
/command_type
layer!