Tim Holy
> is that the residue counter is increased whenever any of the residue labels change: residue number, chain, residue name, segment. If any of those change, we assume that a...
> We do not want residue numbers to be changed when reading protein residues, for example. I think @jgreener64's point is that this admirable goal makes things harder---if you only...
We've also gotten a lot of benefit from random-access indexing. For example we might pick out all the positively-charged residues and examine their spatial distribution. We also compute displacement vectors...
Let's rope in @IanButterworth
Sorry I haven't had time for "general"/"charitable" development lately. My busy schedule is likely to persist another couple of weeks at least. If anyone wants to take this effort over,...
I'll get to this in another week or two.
Yes, I think it's making some assumptions about what those indices mean. It's basically expecting that it narrowed the interval and is still within epsilon of flat. We could probably...
#911 introduced `lookup` but also made JuliaInterpreter 0.10 the minimum acceptable bound. Thus it seems the only way you could have gotten into this situation is https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/35663. Not Revise's fault,...
See https://github.com/JuliaLang/JuliaSyntax.jl/issues/316#issuecomment-1870294857 and https://github.com/JuliaLang/JuliaSyntax.jl/pull/493
Would you be OK with waiting for a release that contains your other fixes, and then we make a 1.1.0 release that makes Julia 1.10 (the future LTS) the minimum...