Hi Jeremy,

OK, that makes sense. Thanks again!

Clare

On 24 August 2012 02:17, Jeremy Goecks <jeremy.goe...@emory.edu> wrote:
>> I think that handle_input() executes the tool?
>
> That's the intention and it should work but it hasn't been tested.
>
>> Also, separately there
>> is a method called _run_tool()  (although unlike _rerun_tool() I can't
>> see anything that calls it).
>
> Looks like _run_tool is almost a copy of what's in create(). This is probably 
> legacy code from refactoring that hasn't been cleaned up yet.
>
>> So, I thought from looking at the surface, that the tool-running code
>> was there and that I just didn't know what data structure to pass into
>> payload['inputs'] .  Is it not doing what I think?
>
> I think your inference is correct, but, yes, there's the problem of 
> specifying the tool input data structure. Tool inputs are specified as 
> dictionaries (often with nested dictionaries for things like conditionals), 
> so you could construct an appropriate input dictionary and could (likely) run 
> a tool. However, there's no help in the API right now to help you construct 
> an appropriate dictionary for a tool; this is the big missing piece in the 
> tools API.
>
> Best,
> J.
>



-- 

Clare Sloggett
Research Fellow / Bioinformatician
Life Sciences Computation Centre
Victorian Life Sciences Computation Initiative
University of Melbourne, Parkville Campus
187 Grattan Street, Carlton, Melbourne
Victoria 3010, Australia
Ph: 03 903 53357          M: 0414 854 759

___________________________________________________________
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

  http://lists.bx.psu.edu/

Reply via email to