I was wondering if anyone knows how to add comments to a fasta file. I tried using the # character but it doesn't sit well with alignment algorithms/software.
Thanks,
What I usually found is that there are no comments. But in the wikipedia article it says that you could add comments after the > line if starting with ;. But I have never found anyone with this notation.
But I have never found any fasta file with comments. Usually the header or the name get this attribution so > E.coli can be converted to > E.coli X43 methanol as you can see here
But usually, as seen here, and here is added as a description as said.
You are not allowed to adds comment IN the sequence. But you could add a comment within an alternative format like one of the XML-based ones published by the NCBI.
Related
i am reading swift from apple docs and learning about statements. but couldnot find any information about the Line Control Statements.
According to the docs
A line control statement is used to specify a line number and filename
that can be different from the line number and filename of the source
code being compiled. Use a line control statement to change the source
code location used by Swift for diagnostic and debugging purposes.
A line control statement has the following forms:
#sourceLocation(file: filename, line: line number)
#sourceLocation()
My question is when should i use it? The docs lags an example about the topic.Any links or some hints would be helpful.
This isn't the sort of thing you'd ever need as a beginner, and you could probably go through an entire career without using it. It seems to be meant for use in tools that generate source code. See the comments in the original feature proposal for the complete story.
TL/DR: Don't worry about it, you'll never need it.
I would like to create Issues / Work items / code Review with comments to certain lines of code that directly link to the file and version.
did I miss that feature? or would it be a case for UserVoice* asking for that feature?
(* for which I would not qualify obviously unless MSDN subscriber)
Yes, it is possible for you to add comments to specific code blocks or links.
In the Comments section, select the changed file. Then in the comparison view, right-click in the specific code block and select Add Comment.
Then you will see that the code line information is included in the comments:
For example :
If I had http://somepage.com/somefolder/someresouce?p1=value&p2=value&p3=value
I would like to see a column that would display the value of p2 if it existed in the request.
I googled, asked people around but can't find a good answer.
If think creating a dissector might help, but I don't want to write a new dissector for http.. that's an overkill.
And there is no http.request.queryParams["p2"] syntax for use of Custom Column type.
Thanks in advance!
Edit : I solved my own Question, adding the best implementation so far in my own answer below.
Well, the solution was indeed in dissectors.
Wireshark help is not very good, the examples are ok though.
The main problem was that wireshark help defines that you can write your lua script, and place it in the plugins directory, which is searched recursively for lua files.
I did place my lua there and nothing worked, After almost 2 hours of fiddling, I found out instead of putting it in the plugins directory, it had to be in plugins//myScript.lua in order to work...
Now just to share my work :
To answer my own question :
http://pastebin.com/eANEut92
Bet you didn't see this coming? ;)
So, a project of mine requires that I specifically read and make sense out of .htaccess files.
Sadly, searching on Google only yields the infinite woes of people trying to get their own .htaccess to work (sorry, couldn't resist the comment).
Anyway, I'm a bit scared of trying to get this thing out of open-source projects that use it. See, in the past few weeks, I ended up wasting a lot of time trying to fix my issues with this strategy, only to find out that I did better to read RFCs & specs and build the thing my way.
So, if you know about a library, or any (hopefully clean!) code that does this, please do share. In the mean time, if you know about any articles about .htaccess file format, I'm sure they'll be very handy. Thanks.
NB: I'm pretty much multilingual and could make use of any codebase, even though the end code will be Delphi. I know I'm asking too much, but I'd love to see less of C++. Just think of my mental health before sharing C++ code. :)
Edit: Well, I think I'm just going to do this manually myself. The file structure seems to be:
directive arg1 arg2 argN
<begin directive section>
</end directive section>
# single line comment
.htaccess grammar is actually the exact same as the Apache configuration itself, and example parsers do exist for it.
If you're looking to write your own, you are mostly correct on the format. Remember, section tags can be nested and can have parameters (like <Location />)
English method of parsing:
For each line in the file:
Strip whitespace from beginning and end of line.
If the line starts with a '#':
Parse it as a comment (or skip it)
Else, If the line starts with a '<':
If the next character is a '/', the line is a closing tag:
Seek to the next '>' to get the tag name, and pop it from the tag stack.
Else, the line is an opening tag:
Seek to the next '>' for the tag name.
If the tag, trimmed, contains whitespace:
Split on the first whitespace. The right side is params, left is the tag.
(IfModule, Location, etc use this)
Push the tag name to the tag stack.
Else, the line is a directive:
Split the line on whitespace. This is the directive and params.
Just add quote handling and you're set.
I hope, this question is not too offtopic.
I have a bigger school project which involves some documentation. The documentation is a LaTeX file, and looks like this:
...
some explanation
\section {someCode}
\include{someCode.hs}
some explanation
...
The files someCode.hs.tex are auto-genereated from their corresponding .hs-Files using Pygments and a Makefile.
The Problem is: Each time, I include something, a pagebreak is inserted before. This is neither expected nor wanted. I googled, but found no answer. Any ideas?
Use \input instead of \include.