-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
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
Update MNE compatibility to >0.17, fix bug with stimulus integer codes <length 3 in events #26
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #26 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 94.84% 94.89% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 3 3
Lines 194 196 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 184 186 +2
Misses 10 10
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #26 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 94.84% 94.89% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 3 3
Lines 194 196 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 184 186 +2
Misses 10 10
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
twidth = int(np.ceil(np.log10(np.max(events[:, 1])))) | ||
twidth = twidth if twidth > 3 else 3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what are the reasons that it would be greater than 3?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think there are none (waiting for a reply by BrainProducts, whether this would even be supported)
but until we know for sure, I think it's better so only fix what is broken :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
makes sense to me - maybe we should add in a comment saying as much? I'm always nervous about adding in these kinds of lines where it's not explicit why "3" is the right number here. Right now we know this is the case, but I imagine a future where we look at this line of code and are like "why the hell did we cap it to 3?!"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sounds good :-) fixed in 1baee69
nice - LGTM then :-) |
fixes #24