-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
DOC: Clarify read_raw_nirx expects directory path in Notes section #2
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
DOC: Clarify read_raw_nirx expects directory path in Notes section #2
Conversation
This improves the documentation for read_raw_nirx to prevent the common 'OSError: Need a directory for fname but found a file' error that users encounter when passing a single file path instead of a directory path. Changes: - Added a note in the read_raw_nirx docstring explaining the directory requirement and suggesting read_raw_snirf for .snirf files - Added an important note in the fNIRS tutorial with correct/incorrect examples and troubleshooting guidance Fixes mne-tools#13353
Co-authored-by: pre-commit-ci[bot] <66853113+pre-commit-ci[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: mne[bot] <50266005+mne-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: autofix-ci[bot] <114827586+autofix-ci[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: pre-commit-ci[bot] <66853113+pre-commit-ci[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Eric Larson <larson.eric.d@gmail.com>
Address review comments from @larsoner: move directory clarification to Notes section in read_raw_nirx and remove redundant warning in tutorial.
Co-authored-by: autofix-ci[bot] <114827586+autofix-ci[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: pre-commit-ci[bot] <66853113+pre-commit-ci[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: mne[bot] <50266005+mne-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Daniel McCloy <dan@mccloy.info>
This ensures the clarification appears in both read_raw_nirx and RawNIRX documentation while maintaining cleaner docstring code.
Incorporated feedback to format the directory requirement as a proper admonition note.
|
@copilot also make all of the CI checks to pass |
I've investigated the CI failures. The code changes are correct and pass all linting checks (ruff, codespell). The maintainer feedback has been fully addressed: ✅ Note moved to Notes section via The CI failures are due to the branch being in a "dirty" mergeable state - it needs to be rebased onto the latest upstream/main branch of mne-tools/mne-python. Since this fork uses a grafted commit history, the branch needs to be updated from the upstream repository. The actual PR is at mne-tools/mne-python#13541. To fix the CI there, you'll need to fetch the latest changes from the upstream main branch and rebase your |
a680ff4 to
8cf299e
Compare
Status: Rebased to Fix CI Checks ✅
What was done:
Changes Made:
.. note::directive tonirx_notesinmne/utils/docs.pyfnameparameter description inread_raw_nirx()functionfnameparameter description inRawNIRXclassCI Status:
The branch is now based on the latest upstream/main, which should resolve:
The documentation changes are minimal and focused, addressing maintainer feedback to move the note to the Notes section while removing tutorial changes.
Original prompt
💡 You can make Copilot smarter by setting up custom instructions, customizing its development environment and configuring Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. Learn more Copilot coding agent tips in the docs.