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

Rename add_* tool functions #474

Closed
CodyCBakerPhD opened this issue Jun 9, 2023 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1015 or #1027
Closed

Rename add_* tool functions #474

CodyCBakerPhD opened this issue Jun 9, 2023 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1015 or #1027

Comments

@CodyCBakerPhD
Copy link
Member

Originally posted by @h-mayorquin in #455 (comment)

I think it would be nice if all the other names in the tools followed the convention of to_nwb. Right now, they are add_recorder, add_sorting instead of add_recorder_to_nwb

So to clarify, we want all the helper functions under tools to follow the convention add_{native API object/class type}_to_nwb

E.g., what is currently add_sorting in tools.spikeinterface should become add_sorting_to_nwb

Should this also apply to the write_* methods? E.g., write_sorting -> write_sorting_to_nwb?

@h-mayorquin
Copy link
Collaborator

Making everything both consistent and explicit seems like the way to go to me. My vote is for that.

@CodyCBakerPhD
Copy link
Member Author

@h-mayorquin But what's the boundary on 'explicit'? Should it be the full snake case of the native API object class, e.g., add_recording_extractor_to_nwb?

@CodyCBakerPhD
Copy link
Member Author

to differentiate add_neo_rawio_to_nwb from add_neo_extractor_to_nwb (not that we would ever have that; even if we did they would be in different submodules; just asking w.r.t consistency)

@h-mayorquin
Copy link
Collaborator

Yeah, that would be fine to me. Most people feel umcomfortable with that much verbosity but I don't. I am more concern with the consistency in the suffix to fully indicate the action that with the part of the name that characterize the object being added.

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