missingseems obvious. But, that runs the risk of propagating through a chain of functions the users has, turning them all into
missing. I'm sure that could lead to weird bugs.
nothing. I guess
missingis more obvious, but
nothingwill almost immediately raise an error in most code which is more convenient.
missingto a function where its behaviour IS defined (such as arithmetic operations). For example, one might count coverage by getting the position of a read (which can be unavailable) and doing arithmetic on that.
missingas well as nothing in internal code, if I don't want the user to see confusing error messages.
missingprobably leads to equally fast code. If I want a
nothingto be able to be returned, there'd be no check. If a returned
nothingwould wreck some internal XAM.jl function, and I'd have to put a check for that, then I'd probably also need a check for
missingand b) favors
ifor just using dispatch and union splitting). This might be more natural to them than using (an inefficient anyway) try catch method of trying to handle these missing fields.
missing. My repo for development is at https://github.com/jakobnissen/XAM.jl (can later be copied back into Bio-something.jl). Currently progressing at a glacial pace.
open("tmp-u8.txt", "w") do io write(io, UInt8(5)) #00000101 write(io, UInt8('5’)) #00110101 end
xxd. The command used in the screenshot above was,
xxd -b tmp-u8.txt.
Base.transcodein the docs and thought of your project — I don’t know if it’s useful to you.