Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feat/parameterizer interface #22

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

annamarieweber
Copy link
Collaborator

creating a new pull request bc my fork got messed up so this was easier to do. Still have some final cleanup to do but the functionality is all there.

@review-notebook-app
Copy link

Check out this pull request on  ReviewNB

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.


Powered by ReviewNB

Copy link
Owner

@orionarcher orionarcher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall, this is looking good! Well done.

A couple things I'd like to see before merging:

  1. tests passing

  2. it'd be awesome to get a line-by-line walkthrough of the parameterizer.py during a synchronous meeting.

Comment on lines +9 to +10
def UNEXPECTED_TOPOLOGY_TYPE(parametizer_type, actual, expected):
return f"{parametizer_type.name} requires topology of type {expected} but got type {actual}"
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Really nice messaging approach!

INTERCHANGE_PARAMETERIZER: dict[str,list[str]] = {
"sage": ["openff_unconstrained-2.0.0.offxml"]
}
DEFAULT_PARAMETERIZER: dict[str,list[str]] = OPENMM_PARAMETERIZER
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's make the default Interchange

from typing import List, Optional, Dict


class TestParameterizer(unittest.TestCase):
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are tests currently passing?

},
{
"smile":"[Cl-]",
"force_field": "amoeba",
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What's the behavior if no force_field is specified?

It'd be great to have an option to specify a default FF for all mol_specs

Comment on lines +346 to +347
If custom force field files are being used with a non-OpenMM parameterizer.
If no custom force field files are provided when using custom force fields.
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How are we currently supporting arbitrary .xml files that aren't in the interchange, openmm, or openff lists?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants