Closed y1zhou closed 6 months ago
@douweschulte It seems the ReadOptions
hasn't made its way into the core parser yet? The open_with_options
function only passes ReadOptions.level
into the open_pdb
/ open_mmcif
function and ignores all other fields.
To implement the only_atomic_data
read option we'd need corresponding open_pdb_with_options
and open_mmcif_with_options
as well, right? I assume you don't want to modify the original signatures directly for backward compatibility.
Yes something like that has to be added. On not changing the API, you can change the 'core' methods (meaning the one that actually does the parsing), but make sure to keep this one private and keep the current open functions as calls to the core functions with the default ReadOptions
for example.
I have created another issue for finishing my implementation of the ReadOptions
. #125
Sorry for leaving it half done, I got stuck with some other PhD work.
Cool I'll try to add in the functions that parse ReadOptions
.
Sorry for leaving it half done, I got stuck with some other PhD work.
No worries we are all aware how stressful that can be :)
Perfect!! I am fine with merging right away and doing the
only_load_atomic
together with #125 in another PR or doing that work right here whatever works best for you.
Yes taking that in another PR seems more reasonable. Will send as more work is done!
Fixes #123 and adds a test PDB file containing such
REMARK
records.