You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There is a new package, ivs that implements interval range algebra, that works on generic R types, and should work fine with non-integers.
There would be some awesome advantages to using this over IRanges.
IRanges has a very custom data structure, and we have to add all of our data to be metadata columns of the IRanges object, and switch between them often.
ivs instead can store the intervals as part of a tibble or data.frame
The m/z and frequency values are not naturally integers, so we have to multiply and round out to transform them to be integers for the ranges.
I think ivs will be able to use the frequency values naturally, without any transformation to integers.
So as long as using ivs isn't any slower than IRanges, it would probably make the code easier to maintain and reason over.
I propose we should at least test this using the noise exclusion procedure. We can evaluate the code differences, and check for any changes in execution speed in a limited part of the codebase.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
There is a new package,
ivs
that implements interval range algebra, that works on generic R types, and should work fine with non-integers.There would be some awesome advantages to using this over
IRanges
.So as long as using ivs isn't any slower than IRanges, it would probably make the code easier to maintain and reason over.
I propose we should at least test this using the noise exclusion procedure. We can evaluate the code differences, and check for any changes in execution speed in a limited part of the codebase.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: