-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 223
remove containsKey() from validateParams() #939
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
Conversation
|
closes #937 |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #939 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 69.56% 69.56%
=======================================
Files 34 34
Lines 4173 4173
=======================================
Hits 2903 2903
Misses 1270 1270
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
ewels
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice!
| "params.container", | ||
| "params.singleEnd", | ||
| "params.igenomesIgnore", | ||
| "params.name", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍🏻
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if(rawSchema.keySet().contains('properties') && rawSchema.get('properties').containsKey(ignore_param)) { | ||
| if(rawSchema.keySet().contains('properties') && rawSchema.get('properties').keySet().contains(ignore_param)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ah right, yeah if nothing else this looks more consistent too 👍🏻
I guess that we changed the initial call at some point but as we never tested on a pipeline that had ungrouped params we didn't see the failure / didn't update the second call..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep, I had a feeling this could happen with exactly this part of the code :/
If we use
.keySet().contains()instead of.containsKey(), the problems at https://github.com/nf-core/diaproteomics/pull/103/checks?check_run_id=2167429157 are fixed.