Skip to content
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

Support concatenating groups in query #134

Open
gaow opened this issue May 3, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

Support concatenating groups in query #134

gaow opened this issue May 3, 2018 · 1 comment

Comments

@gaow
Copy link
Member

gaow commented May 3, 2018

Currently:

DSC:
  define:
     c: a * b

then c is not available for query. This is because there will be potential ambiguity in parameter conventions in the concatenated group c that we find conceptually dangerous to attempt to treat. But I think now there are appealing case from my own user case that needs this feature. In part it has something to do with better support for Shell, eg:

preprocess: R(write(...))
   $data: data

workhorse: Shell(exec ... )
   data: $data
   $res: res

postprocess: R(read(...))
   res: $res
   $res: res

DSC:
   define:
      analysis: preprocess * workhorse * postprocess

(As I've discussed before, a full support for mixing language is a separate project but I can get limited cases such as this to work within a few days)

So now it makes sense that we'll only suppose to query on analysis not any of its 3 components.

I propose we have something like this:

DSC:
   concate:
      analysis: preprocess * workhorse * postprocess

that is, one additional keyword eg concate that, when specified, will merge results from the 3 modules for query. Then for non-unique parameters only keep the one from the first module and results from the last module, as we've once discussed. This additional keyword will at least make it conceptually very clear to users. The benenifit is that under the hood the 3 modules are still executed as 3 separate modules, so changes of code in postprocess will not trigger rerun of the potentially time consuming workhorse.

@gaow gaow added the discussion label May 3, 2018
@stephens999
Copy link
Contributor

stephens999 commented May 3, 2018 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants