ENH: return label and description fields from read_raw_egi#13967
Open
obergmartin wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
ENH: return label and description fields from read_raw_egi#13967obergmartin wants to merge 2 commits into
obergmartin wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Member
|
Would it be possible to modify some existing test to show this works? Even something like or whatever you need to do to show that some info is being pulled in would be great Also there are some failures in CIs like |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Reference issue
Fixes #10121
A resurrection!
What does this implement/fix?
This PR ensures that read_raw_egi() returns the label and description fields from EGI's Events_ECI TCP-IP 55513.xml file as a dictionary in the Annotations.extra field.
I wrote this code myself, no AI.
Additional information
I feel it's good to populate the Annotations.extra field directly here in the events.py file as opposed to reading the file a second time from an external function and ensuring that timestamps match up.
I changed the data type returned in event_tims by _read_mff_events() from a list to a dict. I felt this was better than returning an extra variable.
Since the original #10121, I see #8038 has been opened and this data is being read by mffpy. These changes allow the eventTrack data to make its way into Annotations.