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 <
kasperdanielhansen@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.michael@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]]

