MRG: Write events.json with "sample", "value", and "trial_type" entries #1132
Conversation
hoechenberger
force-pushed
the
hoechenberger/issue1130
branch
from
177828e to
da449e4
Compare
| fname = Path(fname) | ||
| if fname.exists(): | ||
| orig_data = json.loads( | ||
| fname.read_text(encoding='utf-8'), | ||
| object_pairs_hook=OrderedDict | ||
| ) | ||
| new_data = {**orig_data, **new_data} | ||
|
|
||
| _write_json(fname, new_data, overwrite) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code duplication from below. But I felt it wasn't worth creating a new helper function for this. thoughts?
hoechenberger
force-pushed
the
hoechenberger/issue1130
branch
from
bb50fd2 to
6c2e9ed
Compare
hoechenberger
changed the title
hoechenberger
force-pushed
the
hoechenberger/issue1130
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1f6e157 to
e4a0c82
Compare
hoechenberger
changed the title
hoechenberger
force-pushed
the
hoechenberger/issue1130
branch
from
e4a0c82 to
5f2bc95
Compare
| """ | ||
| new_data = { | ||
| 'sample': { | ||
| 'Description': 'The event onset time in number of sampling points.' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
needs clarification whether 0based or 1based indexing is used
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know which one we use, and I don't know how it interacts with raw.first_samp
Could you help?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know either, but let's merge this and make a new issue to improve on this later. raw.first_samp is always confusing :)
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1132 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 95.27% 95.28%
=======================================
Files 40 40
Lines 8682 8694 +12
=======================================
+ Hits 8272 8284 +12
Misses 410 410
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
Fixes #1130
Also adding
trial_typehere because it's also considered an optional column that should come with an accompanying entry inevents.jsonNot adding
Levelsfortrial_typehere, though – this would need discussion