[Bioc-devel] coerce ExpressionSet to SummarizedExperiment
Ludwig.Geistlinger at bio.ifi.lmu.de
Mon Sep 11 21:31:37 CEST 2017
Concerning 1) Why have some developers chosen to extend eSet instead of
As far as I understand it, ExpressionSet was thought to exclusively
represent a microarray experiment (MIAME = Minimum Information About a
Thus, back in the days when more and more people started using RNA-seq and
there was no SummarizedExperiment, developers extended eSet with e.g.
assayData slots called `counts` instead of `exprs` to represent RNA-seq
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 2:02 PM, HervÃ© PagÃ¨s <hpages at fredhutch.org>
>> I added coercion from ExpressionSet to SummarizedExperiment in
>> SummarizedExperiment 1.7.6.
> Thank you HervÃ©!
>> The current behavior of the SummarizedExperiment() constructor
>> when called on a ExpressionSet object doesn't make much sense to
>> me. I'd rather have it consistent with what the coercion does.
>> Will fix it.
> Thank you, again.
> A couple more questions while I'm at it, that may expose the limitations
> my understanding of inheritance and project history... 1) Why have some
> developers chosen to extend eSet instead of ExpressionSet (definition
> and 2) why are these coercion methods developed for ExpressionSet rather
> than eSet? Wouldn't an eSet coercion method be preferable because it would
> cover ExpressionSet as well as all the classes that extend eSet?
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> Bioc-devel at r-project.org mailing list
Dr. Ludwig Geistlinger
eMail: Ludwig.Geistlinger at bio.ifi.lmu.de
More information about the Bioc-devel