Allow N - #597
Conversation
|
Hello @killercup, Out of curiosity, where are you getting sequencing reads with Thanks for the contribution, I'll take a look when I start rolling up all the changes for v0.6.2. One thing of note, this code is part of the hottest most critical loop in pileup, so I'll have to make sure there isn't any performance regression. From a quick glance, it should be fine, but I'll need to check. If you have a |
|
Thanks for the quick reply! We're working on https://bitbucket.org/bsblabludwig/rastair which works with TAPS reads and can write modBAM. Good point about the performance, I can compare this for you. (Might have to wait until tomorrow though) |
|
Yes I saw Rastair, looks like a nice project! No rush on the perf data. Thanks for the contribution. |
|
Thank you for fixing the original reverse-scanner
The minimal completion is to skip only the unclassifiable aligned observation and retain the pending state, saving newly advanced state before fallible conversion. Exact optimized/generic regressions are in
I am closing our overlapping PR #714 so this remains the single active PR for ordinary IUPAC handling; its branch and tests remain available as implementation evidence. Performance context, with an important limitation: these numbers test the separate broader implementation in #714, not this PR. Against upstream |
We were testing with a BAM file where reads have
Ns and modkit crashed on theunreachable!inmodkit-core/src/pileup/base_mods_adapter.rs:77. I think this "fixes" this by ignoring this position. I also tried to come up with some other places this could be problematic and then also tried to have Claude write tests that exercise this.