Closed JoaoRodrigues closed 4 years ago
Merging #20 into master will decrease coverage by
0.27%
. The diff coverage is69.23%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #20 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 81.79% 81.51% -0.28%
==========================================
Files 43 44 +1
Lines 3471 3549 +78
Branches 730 747 +17
==========================================
+ Hits 2839 2893 +54
- Misses 447 464 +17
- Partials 185 192 +7
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
pdbtools/pdb_uniq.py | 69.23% <69.23%> (ø) |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ba5bfdd...a8c0130. Read the comment docs.
Merging #20 into master will decrease coverage by
0.14%
. The diff coverage is71.59%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #20 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 81.79% 81.64% -0.15%
==========================================
Files 43 45 +2
Lines 3471 3612 +141
Branches 730 766 +36
==========================================
+ Hits 2839 2949 +110
- Misses 447 468 +21
- Partials 185 195 +10
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
pdbtools/pdb_uniq.py | 71.59% <71.59%> (ø) |
|
pdbtools/pdb_selhetatm.py | 88.67% <0%> (ø) |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ba5bfdd...8f6dc18. Read the comment docs.
I thought of that but you can always do pdb_selhetatm file.pdb | pdb_uniq
. Would it work?
I guess it would do the job, but personally I don't see when I would use such a pdb_uniq
tool.
Having first to select the HETATM and then use pdb_uniq
seems cumbersome. I would rather like to know what is in a file without having to first select parts.
pdb_wc
already tells you the number of chains and if there is an HETATM or not. Knowing the chainIDs and the ligand resname is all I would be interested in. Which amino acids are presents seems rather irrelevant.
But that's only my view of it of course
Could not we have a third option/line output with heteroatoms? Putting everything under "Residues" could be slightly misleading and the distinction would greatly improve the readability in my opinion.
I see that's a wanted feature :) I'll change it!
Added a -h
flag to show HETATM residue names.
Superseeded by #51
Addresses issue #12. I opted by creating a new tool instead of changing
pdb_wc
. It lists unique residue names and chain identifiers, which I consider to be the most commonly sought things? It keeps the order in which things were found (instead of alphabetical or so).