Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:31:46 +0100
>Hmm. Not sure why we need the Computation object for this. GeneStructure
>already implements this.
Yes, I agree, but computation.pm can, without adaption, store more types;
for example if you would like to store Acceptor/Donor site location,
transcriptions factor binding site's or whatever.
And another pre to using the computation object in my view is that you do
not have to know what is in there, you can get an array from the object
containing the names of the stored subfeature types.
Genestructure is, on the other side, more sophisticated than Computation
because it can return a cds. In my opinion, the genestructure object could
inherit from computation?
>Remember what Ewan said? The ones with the working code win. There is no
>such thing as someone rejecting a module (provided it works :)
Actually i didn't remember, but I would like to see a consensus, and if the
bioperl community does not think that it is a valuable addition, I will
Concerning Ewan's remarks of producing an interface, I could agree, it won't
be a problem to rewrite.