-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Use ext
directive instead of custom extra
directive
#69
Comments
Maybe an even simpler solution is the So you could use |
Thank you very much for the suggestion, Ben. However, at this time, I’m not sure we have the resources to implement it. Will let you know if we decide to move forward with this idea. |
Of course it's up to you to decide when and how to implement it, since it's your plugin. But I also wanted to mention, we are working on a more strict syntax parser for Nextflow scripts, which will not support something like |
Thanks for the updates. So we will definitely do this sooner or later. |
I took some time to look into this issue and it is not complex. So I fixed it and tested it. Looks good so far. |
Change is available in nf-float 0.4.4 |
The float executor currently uses a custom process directive
extra
to apply float CLI options to specific processes:However, this is using a hack by setting a directive with the equals sign. It's an unfortunate aspect of the current Nextflow DSL that this syntax happens to be allowed, but only the following syntax is intentionally supported:
This is how users normally specify directives, but if they try this with
extra
then it will fail, because it is not defined as a directive in Nextflow.I ignored it for a while because I see the value of this directive and couldn't provide an "official" way to implement it. But now I realize it can be done with the ext directive. This directive basically allows for custom directives, so you can use it to define process-specific CLI options, for example:
This approach is much more aligned with what Nextflow users expect. Note also that the custom options are defined in the config file instead of the process definition, so a user can define them in a custom config file without having to modify the pipeline code.
Happy to review the code if you decide to implement it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: