Hi Felix,

This should be addressed in S4Vectors 0.17.11. Thanks for the catch and
for the nice reproducible example.

Best,
H.


On 11/26/2017 04:09 AM, Felix Ernst wrote:
Hi all,

I got different results constructing a SummarizedExperiment in 3.6 and 3.7. My 
question is, whether this is intentional or a bug.

library(GenomicRanges)
library(SummarizedExperiment)

nrows <- 200; ncols <- 6
counts <- matrix(runif(nrows * ncols, 1, 1e4), nrows)
colnames(counts) <- LETTERS[1:6]
rownames(counts) <- 1:nrows
counts2 <- counts-floor(counts)
rowRanges <- GRanges(rep(c("chr1", "chr2"), c(50, 150)),
                      IRanges(floor(runif(200, 1e5, 1e6)), width=100),
                      strand=sample(c("+", "-"), 200, TRUE),
                      feature_id=sprintf("ID%03d", 1:200))
colData <- DataFrame(Treatment=rep(c("ChIP", "Input"), 3),
                      row.names=LETTERS[1:6])

se <- SummarizedExperiment(assays=list(counts=counts),
                            rowRanges=rowRanges,
                            colData=colData)

str(assays(se)$counts)
assays(se)$counts2 <- as.data.frame(counts2)
str(assays(se)$counts)

On a Windows 10 R3.4.2 Bioc 3.6 this produces:
num [1:200, 1:6] 8815 6314 1945 6185 5935 ...
  - attr(*, "dimnames")=List of 2
   ..$ : chr [1:200] "1" "2" "3" "4" ...
   ..$ : chr [1:6] "A" "B" "C" "D" ...
  num [1:200, 1:6] 8815 6314 1945 6185 5935 ...
  - attr(*, "dimnames")=List of 2
   ..$ : chr [1:200] "1" "2" "3" "4" ...
   ..$ : chr [1:6] "A" "B" "C" "D" ...

On Ubuntu 17.10 R-devel r73779 Bioc3.7  this produces
num [1:200, 1:6] 8636 7040 9275 4821 2475 ...
  - attr(*, "dimnames")=List of 2
   ..$ : chr [1:200] "1" "2" "3" "4" ...
   ..$ : chr [1:6] "A" "B" "C" "D" ...
  num [1:1200] 8636 7040 9275 4821 2475 ...

Somehow the structure is lost.

This happens, if I mix matrix and data.frame data, and doesn’t, if I use only 
matrices. The man page defines matrix-like objects,
which a data.frame is (isn’t it?) and the behavior is different from Bioc3.6 to 
Bioc3.7.

I can rule out that this is a Windows/Linux thing, because the Travis build 
error, which pointed to an difference in the first place,
didn‘t occur with bioc-release, just with bioc-devel.

Thanks for any advice and suggestions.

Felix

        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__stat.ethz.ch_mailman_listinfo_bioc-2Ddevel&d=DwIGaQ&c=eRAMFD45gAfqt84VtBcfhQ&r=BK7q3XeAvimeWdGbWY_wJYbW0WYiZvSXAJJKaaPhzWA&m=r0ReaWhkBHVdtwgDqm28L7sqt0X9ojrCFKYn2Q0gV-I&s=qmErsDhhNpyiprtwyB72UUXQr33EJH8nd4JupFmmSBA&e=


--
Hervé Pagès

Program in Computational Biology
Division of Public Health Sciences
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
1100 Fairview Ave. N, M1-B514
P.O. Box 19024
Seattle, WA 98109-1024

E-mail: hpa...@fredhutch.org
Phone:  (206) 667-5791
Fax:    (206) 667-1319

_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel

Reply via email to