CWL Release 1.0: Why having both default and valueFrom fields on WorkflowStepInput?
1
0
Entering edit mode
4.9 years ago

Hi, I am working on an implementation of CWL and I don't understand, why would WorkflowStepInput have 2 fields simultaneously: valueFrom and default: http://www.commonwl.org/v1.0/Workflow.html#WorkflowStepInput.

I understand that valueFromallows us to hard-code the value, supplied to a step input, or make it a dynamically evaluatable expression (if we don't want this step to take its input value from workflow input or output of another step). But why would I need default field then, except that it is a legacy field from the times of draft-2?

cwl • 1.2k views
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode

I have seen several CWL posts now, could somebody explain the relation to bioinformatics of the questions? I see that it is a very useful tool also for bioinformatics but not only, but some questions seem to be very much about the details of its implementation that are not at all bioinformatics specific.

ADD REPLY
0
Entering edit mode

Lets discuss this elsewhere -- maybe create an issue at https://github.com/ialbert/biostar-central/issues & tag me? I'm mr-c on Github.

ADD REPLY
0
Entering edit mode
4.9 years ago

This was answered on GitHub: https://github.com/common-workflow-language/common-workflow-language/issues/358#issuecomment-267011066

Your hypothesis that this is left over from draft-2 makes the most sense. I'll let @tetron and @ntijanic chime in with their perspectives.

I support marking as deprecated the use of valueFrom with a constant string (which should have been Any or CWLType) and for removal in v2.0 of this usage altogether..

ADD COMMENT

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 1974 users visited in the last hour
Help About
FAQ
Access RSS
API
Stats

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Powered by the version 2.3.6