Thanks John!

On Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:43:21 AM UTC-8, John Myles White wrote:
>
> I finally updated METADATA to point to the fixed version of BloomFilters.
>
>  — John
>
> On Dec 6, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 12:14 PM, David Koslicki <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Implementing your own Bloom filter really shouldn't be too hard. 
>>> Alternatively, it might not be too hard to file some issues against John's 
>>> package and get it into better working state. If you mention me in an 
>>> issue, I can also take a look at things. Having the BloomFilters package 
>>> working would probably be a good thing.
>>>
>>
>> If you look at the link I provided, you'll see that I've previously done 
>> exactly as you're suggesting. 
>>
>
> Great. Thanks for helping out!
>
> Exactly, and that's why I'm using my own implementation.
>>
>> I have thought using using a single string to store all the smaller 
>> strings, but I think it's even more computationally difficult to come up 
>> with a single (shortest) string that contains all my specified substrings 
>> (and no more).  Correct me if I am wrong on this point though, as that 
>> would be great!
>>
>
> I meant to just use a single BioSeq array and concatenate all the 
> sequences, not trying to make the overlap. This just reduces the overhead, 
> it's not a compression technique.
>
>
>

Reply via email to