gatk-3.8/public/java/test
Mauricio Carneiro ffd61f4c1c Refactor the Pileup Element with regards to indels
Eric reported this bug due to the reduced reads failing with an index out of bounds on what we thought was a deletion, but turned out to be a read starting with insertion.

   * Refactored PileupElement to distinguish clearly between deletions and read starting with insertion
   * Modified ExtendedEventPileup to correctly distinguish elements with deletion when creating new pileups
   * Refactored most of the lazyLoadNextAlignment() function of the LocusIteratorByState for clarity and to create clear separation between what is a pileup with a deletion and what's not one. Got rid of many useless if statements.
   * Changed the way LocusIteratorByState creates extended event pileups to differentiate between insertions in the beginning of the read and deletions.
   * Every deletion now has an offset (start of the event)
   * Fixed bug when LocusITeratorByState found a read starting with insertion that happened to be a reduced read.
   * Separated the definitions of deletion/insertion (in the beginning of the read) in all UG annotations (and the annotator engine).
   * Pileup depth of coverage for a deleted base will now return the average coverage around the deletion.
   * Indel ReadPositionRankSum test now uses the deletion true offset from the read, changed all appropriate md5's
   * The extra pileup elements now properly read by the Indel mode of the UG made any subsequent call have a different random number and therefore all RankSum tests have slightly different values (in the 10^-3 range). Updated all appropriate md5s after extremely careful inspection -- Thanks Ryan!

 phew!
2012-01-24 16:07:21 -05:00
..
net/sf Removed annoying FastaSequenceIndexBuilderProgressListener infrastructure that was just a boolean switch on whether to print progress or not. 2011-07-27 22:06:23 -04:00
org/broadinstitute/sting Refactor the Pileup Element with regards to indels 2012-01-24 16:07:21 -05:00