Rename fiber ports

[joamatab]

edge and vertical ports should be called differently than optical

this PR changes them to vertical_{polarization}

@tvt173

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @joamatab - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟡 General issues: 4 issues found
• 🟢 Security: all looks good
• 🟡 Testing: 3 issues found
• 🟢 Complexity: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.}

[sourcery-ai]

suggestion (code_clarification): Consider documenting the addition of 'port_order_types' parameter.

Adding new parameters can affect how the function is used or its outputs. It's important to update the documentation to reflect these changes and provide guidance on how to use the new parameter.

[sourcery-ai]

suggestion (testing): Missing test for updated port_order_types parameter.

The changes to the 'port_order_types' parameter in 'edge_coupler_silicon' and 'edge_coupler_silicon_2' should be covered by unit tests to ensure that the new naming convention is correctly implemented and does not affect other functionalities.

[sourcery-ai]

suggestion (testing): Missing test for dynamic port_type based on polarization.

The introduction of a dynamic 'port_type' based on the 'polarization' parameter should be validated through tests to ensure that it behaves as expected across different inputs.

Suggested change

	port_type=f"optical_{polarization}",
	import pytest
	@pytest.mark.parametrize("polarization", ["TE", "TM", "random"])
	def test_port_type(polarization):
	expected_port_type = f"optical_{polarization}"
	# Assuming a function `create_component` that uses the `port_type` logic
	component = create_component(polarization=polarization)
	assert component.port_type == expected_port_type

[sourcery-ai]

suggestion (testing): Ensure consistency in port naming convention.

The test should verify that the new 'vertical_{polarization}' naming is consistent across all components and does not introduce discrepancies.

Suggested change

	port_type=f"vertical_{polarization}",
	import pytest
	def test_vertical_polarization_naming_consistency():
	# Assuming `get_port_type` is a method that retrieves the port type of a component
	# and `expected_polarization` is the polarization we expect to be part of the port type name.
	component = create_grating_coupler() # Function to create a grating coupler component
	port_type = component.get_port_type()
	expected_polarization = "vertical_TE" # Example polarization, adjust as necessary
	assert expected_polarization in port_type, f"Port type '{port_type}' does not include expected polarization '{expected_polarization}'"

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 71.73%. Comparing base (e1a2ad3) to head (9883c6a).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2700   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   71.73%   71.73%           
=======================================
  Files         366      366           
  Lines       23784    23784           
  Branches     3876     3876           
=======================================
  Hits        17061    17061           
  Misses       5593     5593           
  Partials     1130     1130           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.