Michael Heuer wrote:
I think it might make more sense to create an interface OrderedAlignment
as you suggest than to change an implementation detail in the existing
code.
michael
But adding ordering doesn't break any old code that wasn't relying on
ordering. It's not like removing ordering f
Monday, September 15, 2003 2:13 AM
> To: Schreiber, Mark
> Cc: Emig, Robin; bio java
> Subject: Re: [Biojava-l] Simple alignment
>
>
> Doesn't TreeMap extend/implement Map? Is there a reason you can't just
> pass a TreeMap into the constructor?
>
> Matthew
>
>
Emig, Robin wrote:
Well, The problem is that the code in biojava is "safe", so it copies the Map first thing, but it copies it into a HashMap. So, since what I really need is the have the same order from an iterator that the file was read, all that needs to be done is to have all instances of Has
ocock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 2:13 AM
To: Schreiber, Mark
Cc: Emig, Robin; bio java
Subject: Re: [Biojava-l] Simple alignment
Doesn't TreeMap extend/implement Map? Is there a reason you can't just
pass a TreeMap into the constructor?
Matthew
Schreiber,
lasses are dependent on SimpleAlignment so it may not pay to change it too much.
- Mark
-Original Message-
From: Emig, Robin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 15/09/2003 3:04 p.m.
To: bio java
Cc:
Subject: [Biojava-l] Simple alignment
Is there any objection
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 15/09/2003 3:04 p.m.
To: bio java
Cc:
Subject: [Biojava-l] Simple alignment
Is there any objection to making SimpleAlignment take a TreeMap
instead of a simple Map? The reason is that order of the sequences in the alignment is
often of importance. I
Is there any objection to making SimpleAlignment take a TreeMap instead of a
simple Map? The reason is that order of the sequences in the alignment is often of
importance. I suppose the alternative is to create a new alignment called
OrderedAlignment.
-Robin
