[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Comments on process template syntax

From: zimoun
Subject: Re: Comments on process template syntax
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 15:56:02 +0100


On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 09:58, Roel Janssen <address@hidden> wrote:

> Perhaps with some parentheses?  That it is a Lisp is a good thing, not
> something you'd rather hide.. :)  Like you've said; what you've defined
> above is a procedure, not a record.  That's a really cool "feature" of
> the GWL!

It is one of the feature I was interested in when I started to look at
GWL: be able to define procedure. For example, it is possible with
Snakemake because it is Python; but it is not convenient to define a
function that returns a 'rule'. Well, when I write "workflow", I am
always tempted to do "(map proc list)" with 'proc' generating (or
manipulating) "processes" (or other).

> Maybe we can just clarify the feature better in the documentation.
> Here's my initial thought:
> ---
> When defining processes, they can be parameterized by turning the
> process definition into a procedure, which will form a template for
> processes to be defined later.  This is done by adding a name for the
> template, and its parameters directly after "process:".
> ---

I agree.

All the best,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]