[Bioperl-l] Auto-method caller proposal

Sendu Bala bix at sendu.me.uk
Tue Jan 9 10:12:39 EST 2007


Nathan (Nat) Goodman wrote:
>>> On Jan 3, 2007, at 1:09 PM, Sendu Bala wrote:
>
>> Alternatively, would the system work if only Bio::Root::RootI was
>> based on Class::AutoClass? What would the necessary code be for
>> changes in RootI and then changes in an existing run-wrapper for
>> example?
> 
> Yes, it should work for Bio::Root::RootI to inherit from AutoClass.
> This, however, would impose AutoClass on every BioPerl-er whether they
> want it or not :)

As a generally useful thing I'd like to see all Bioperl modules have 
easy access to this functionality, just as they can currently call 
_rearrange(). So yes, we would impose AutoClass on everyone. This may 
not be a major burden since it is already an optional pre-requisite. So, 
before I investigate using Class::AutoClass instead of my own proposed 
method, does anyone feel there are good benefits of Class::AutoClass 
over my proposed method (considering I already added a -synonym option 
to it), and do those benefits outweigh having Class::AutoClass as a 
Bioperl installation requirement?


More information about the Bioperl-l mailing list