Closed lbeltrame closed 1 year ago
Hello,
For me when re-reading my code it seems fine. The condition here is playing with c-1 and c segments, the small segment here if I am not mistaken is after the c-1 segment, before the end of the large segment. Then the end should be the end of the large segment. Again really sorry it's been a long time and the code is quite dense to say the least.
If I would want to test it out, one way would be to print the segments and the final table when it happens in a case, and look at the output and if it makes sense compared to the c-1, c segments and the smal segments concerned.
I hope I understood correctly what you were saying.
Best regards, Alexandre
While studying the code I came across this part:
https://github.com/aeeckhou/shallowHRD/blob/341f0fe0e645757b6596b34de5df5cd194703f9c/shallowHRD_hg19_1.13_QDNAseq_no_chrX.R#L1297
To me it looks like the logic there is swapped, because the final
rbind
in case the next index is not present in the long segments dataframe the code addstmp_3mb[c:L_3mb,]
instead of stopping like in all other cases withtmp_0.1_3mb[i,8]
. This instead present in the subsequentelse
block, that is when the loop is not yet at the end of the long segments.If I read this correctly, this code may produce incorrect results here.