Empirical loss model for tidy3d mode solver (Sourcery refactored)

[sourcery-ai]

Pull Request #831 refactored by Sourcery.

Since the original Pull Request was opened as a fork in a contributor's
repository, we are unable to create a Pull Request branching from it.

To incorporate these changes, you can either:

1. Merge this Pull Request instead of the original, or

2. Ask your contributor to locally incorporate these commits and push them to
   the original Pull Request

   Incorporate changes via command line

   git fetch https://github.com/gdsfactory/gdsfactory pull/831/head
   git merge --ff-only FETCH_HEAD
   git push

NOTE: As code is pushed to the original Pull Request, Sourcery will
re-run and update (force-push) this Pull Request with new refactorings as
necessary. If Sourcery finds no refactorings at any point, this Pull Request
will be closed automatically.

See our documentation here.

Run Sourcery locally

Reduce the feedback loop during development by using the Sourcery editor plugin:

• VS Code
• PyCharm

Help us improve this pull request!

[sourcery-ai]

Sourcery Code Quality Report

❌  Merging this PR will decrease code quality in the affected files by 0.80%.

Quality metrics	Before	After	Change
Complexity	6.31 ⭐	6.57 ⭐	0.26 👎
Method Length	116.55 🙂	122.41 😞	5.86 👎
Working memory	14.71 😞	14.70 😞	-0.01 👍
Quality	52.09% 🙂	51.29% 🙂	-0.80% 👎

Other metrics	Before	After	Change
Lines	907	949	42

Changed files	Quality Before	Quality After	Quality Change
gdsfactory/simulation/gtidy3d/modes.py	52.09% 🙂	51.29% 🙂	-0.80% 👎

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File	Function	Complexity	Length	Working Memory	Quality	Recommendation
gdsfactory/simulation/gtidy3d/modes.py	Waveguide.compute_modes	19 😞	822 ⛔	28 ⛔	17.37% ⛔	Refactor to reduce nesting. Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
gdsfactory/simulation/gtidy3d/modes.py	Waveguide.get_n	11 🙂	497 ⛔	19 ⛔	28.01% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
gdsfactory/simulation/gtidy3d/modes.py	plot	6 ⭐	183 😞	15 😞	45.96% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
gdsfactory/simulation/gtidy3d/modes.py	plot_sweep_width	5 ⭐	206 ⛔	13 😞	47.80% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
gdsfactory/simulation/gtidy3d/modes.py	Waveguide.compute_mode_properties	2 ⭐	207 ⛔	11 😞	54.00% 🙂	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

• ⭐ excellent
• 🙂 good
• 😞 poor
• ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.

---

Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Help us improve this quality report!

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
2 Code Smells

No Coverage information
0.0% Duplication

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #832 (b888768) into master (d759947) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #832   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   74.66%   74.66%           
=======================================
  Files         425      425           
  Lines       20979    20979           
  Branches     2840     2840           
=======================================
  Hits        15664    15664           
  Misses       4444     4444           
  Partials      871      871           

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more