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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[Add Check]: add check for if electrodes table x, y, z are NaNs #220

Open
2 tasks done
bendichter opened this issue Jul 8, 2022 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #225
Open
2 tasks done

[Add Check]: add check for if electrodes table x, y, z are NaNs #220

bendichter opened this issue Jul 8, 2022 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #225
Labels
category: new check a new best practices check to apply to all NWBFiles and their contents

Comments

@bendichter
Copy link
Contributor

What would you like to see added to the NWBInspector?

With the new pynwb release, 2.1.0, you no longer need to fill x, y, and z with np.nan. We should make a suggestion to remove these if they are present. Maybe this suggestion should only show up to the nwb schema version is >= 2.5.0. What do you think, @CodyCBakerPhD? Should we make version-specific messages?

Pseudocode or other logic of the check

No response

Do you have any interest in helping implement the check function?

No.

Code of Conduct
@bendichter bendichter added the category: new check a new best practices check to apply to all NWBFiles and their contents label Jul 8, 2022
@CodyCBakerPhD
Copy link
Collaborator

So, a new check that if nwb_schema_version >= 2.5.0 and any_new_optional_electrode_cols_are_nan, alerts the user that they don't need to specify them? I'd be fine with that, yeah. It isn't terribly common to make this type of schema change so we shouldn't get too bogged down from the precedence to make too many version-specific checks.

@CodyCBakerPhD CodyCBakerPhD linked a pull request Jul 11, 2022 that will close this issue
Draft
@CodyCBakerPhD CodyCBakerPhD self-assigned this Jul 11, 2022
@CodyCBakerPhD
Copy link
Collaborator

This seems like a good alternate issue to shift the discussion from #264 of how to handle schema-version specifities in the longer-term

@CodyCBakerPhD CodyCBakerPhD mentioned this issue Sep 23, 2022
Merged
@CodyCBakerPhD CodyCBakerPhD removed their assignment Sep 25, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
category: new check a new best practices check to apply to all NWBFiles and their contents
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
2 participants
@bendichter @CodyCBakerPhD