Right, it would be a choice. The compression is not worth it when the data are dense.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Kasper Daniel Hansen < kasperdanielhan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sounds reasonable, _especially_ if you think it is faster. You're the > expert. I assume you will allow the user to choose the return value? > Having the option of Rle's is still nice, for some use cases. > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Michael Lawrence < > lawrence.mich...@gene.com> wrote: > >> Just a thought: support coverage calculation directly to IntegerList. Will >> very often be faster than RleList, especially when limiting to regions >> without long runs of zeros, and with WGS data. >> >> Something to put on the TODO list? >> >> Michael >> >> [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel >> > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] _______________________________________________ Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
