Skip to content

New tool Addition: Chopper a tool for fast processing (filtering, trimming, ..) of long reads #7046

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lsterck
Copy link
Contributor

@lsterck lsterck commented Jun 12, 2025

FOR CONTRIBUTOR:

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md document and this tool is appropriate for the tools-iuc repo.
  • License permits unrestricted use (educational + commercial)
  • This PR adds a new tool or tool collection
  • This PR updates an existing tool or tool collection
  • This PR does something else (explain below)

Hi,
this is a pull request to add the Chopper tool to the iuc toolshed.
I'm happy to amend any review comments.

best regards,
lieven

Copy link
Contributor

@SaimMomin12 SaimMomin12 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @lsterck for the addition, some review comments inline.

@SaimMomin12 SaimMomin12 changed the title Adding chopper, a tool for fast processing (filtering, trimming, ..) of long read files New tool Addition: Chopper a tool for fast processing (filtering, trimming, ..) of long reads Jun 12, 2025
@lsterck
Copy link
Contributor Author

lsterck commented Jun 13, 2025

right, I think I know what the problem is ... on it.

@lsterck
Copy link
Contributor Author

lsterck commented Jun 13, 2025

OK,
I'm stuck now ....
I thought it was (and it still is apparently) the comparison of the gzipped output files, but that still seems to fail once in a while. The only thing I can imagine is that the stream that gzip receives is not deterministic and thus the gzip version is different (though content is the same but likely different order of reads in the output)

I've ran the local planemo test a couple of times and after the edit I pushed before it seems to consistently pass (which was indeed not the case before) but not here apparently.

What am I missing? Any ideas how to resolve this?

@lsterck
Copy link
Contributor Author

lsterck commented Jun 13, 2025

I could remove the gzip test but I would prefer to keep it if in any way possible (just to also check the gzip option)

@SaimMomin12
Copy link
Contributor

I could remove the gzip test but I would prefer to keep it if in any way possible (just to also check the gzip option)

Maybe you can have try using asserts as per here:

<output name="output_fastq_gz" decompress="true">

@lsterck lsterck requested a review from bgruening June 20, 2025 17:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants