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.

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

Add the mode param for border management. #364

Merged
merged 2 commits into from May 26, 2014

Conversation

matthieudumont
Copy link
Contributor

I added the possibility to specify the mode parameter to scipy's affine_transform to have more control over border management.

The only real code change is the addition of the mode param to the resample method and the passing of this mode to the two affine_transform calls. All the other changes are some pep8ifications while I was there.

mode : string ('constant', 'nearest', 'reflect' or 'wrap')
Points outside the boundaries of the input are filled according
to the given mode.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If you add mode, I guess one should also add cval.

@matthew-brett
Copy link
Contributor

Can you also add some tests to check that the new parameter(s) get applied?

@Garyfallidis
Copy link
Contributor

No, I will write the test for this function. This is some of my very old cold for which I didn't create a test. This is my responsibility. Thank you @matthieudumont for the fix.

@Garyfallidis
Copy link
Contributor

I will add also an issue so that I don't forget about this. Thx!

Garyfallidis added a commit that referenced this pull request May 26, 2014
Add the mode param for border management.
@Garyfallidis Garyfallidis merged commit 8ebe5ef into dipy:master May 26, 2014
@matthieudumont matthieudumont deleted the resample_border_mode branch June 22, 2016 18:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants