-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
Add support for predictions app #364
Conversation
src/resdk/query.py
Outdated
if missing: | ||
# Get corresponding annotation field details in a single query and attach it to | ||
# the values. | ||
for field in self.resolwe.prediction_field.filter(id__in=missing.keys()): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Use .iterate()
to make it more robust.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done. Also on annotation values.
Sample: "sample", | ||
Relation: "relation", | ||
Process: "process", | ||
Data: "data", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This reordering should go into a separate commit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done.
cd4a4d1
to
fe687a5
Compare
5d17b5a
to
2736e71
Compare
to make AnnotationValueQuery more robust
2736e71
to
39a69ba
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great effort, all looks good. Let's start using it and see what else is needed!
missing[value.field_id].append(value) | ||
|
||
if missing: | ||
# Get corresponding annotation field details in a single query and attach it to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Get corresponding prediction field details...
|
||
@property | ||
@assert_object_exists | ||
def modified(self): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This might be nitpicking, but why do we display modified
for the value of created
? Is there a simple explanation for this? AFAIK PredictionValues should not be modified, only new "versions" created? In this case, it would be more intuitive, to just expose this as created, and not expose the modified property at all?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since it is actually the modification date from the user perspective.
When new prediction / annotation is created (that overrides the old one) it can be seen as a modification of an old value. Not sure what is the correct
way of handling this, I can also just leave created
field and remove modified
.
No description provided.