Add option for skipping instrument rescaling when not available #49
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/development
branch
2 times, most recently
from
dedea60 to
8139bae
Compare
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/development
branch
from
8139bae to
b3ca37d
Compare
|
See #47 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As described in #47.
This PR adds an option
error_on_missingtoread_nda(andread) that allows the parser to continue even when instrument scaling is not possible due to to a missing multiplier. The current behaviour is preserved by the default value oferror_on_missing = True.This allows the package to be used more easily downstream without needing to wait for new multipliers to be added and released.
Before merging this, there is no test data available to contributors (presumably you have some somewhere!) so consider this PR as untested! (It works for me with my own data, of course...) -- see #48 for my thoughts on how best to do this.