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
Fix utils docs and affine #352
Conversation
@@ -9,40 +9,641 @@ | |||
Some functions in this module use an affine matrix to represent the coordinate | |||
system associated with the points of a streamline. Dipy uses a similar |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Small comment, I know this was already like this, but it would read better to say "Dipy uses a convention similar to nifti files..."
Overall, all seems good. A few small points:
|
An affine of eye(4) means the streamlines are in voxel coordinates, not real world coordinates. I've done my best to describe this at the beginning of the module, but I'm always a happy to get help writing documentation :). It's in general hard to create an affine from limited information. The affine is not arbitrary and using the wrong affine will result in streamlines being outside the image for example. If the streamlines are loaded from a known file type with good header information, we can build the affine from that. For example |
Any objections to merging this? Is anyone still planning on looking over it? |
Yes sorry for the delay. Regarding your comment about the affine of eye(4) meaning the streamlines are in voxel coordinates, this is true. However, let's say my original data was in a 1x1x1 resolution, and some preprocessing put everything right up to the origin... In that case, an affine of eye(4) would also fit with the world coordinates, except if I really misunderstood something, which can happen :) My case was that it could be written in the doc that, if streamlines correspond to the scenario I just described, an affine of eye(4) could be used. Of course, that's just one use-case. As for the helper function create an affine only from voxel sizes, I agree that's it maybe too much, and could cause havoc for users not knowing what they are doing. I also agree with your point about the deprecation cycle. Should this be written in a doc somewhere, saying what will be deprecated and when? Just so we remember... |
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 6:09 AM, Jean-Christophe Houde <
I also agree with your point about the deprecation cycle. Should this be
We could consider this the doc :). There is a deprecation warning raised
|
All good for me. Can be merged! |
Hey @MrBago - if you rebase this, I can go ahead and merge. Ping me when you are set. |
@MrBago rebase please! GGT! |
@MrBago - just another reminder: please rebase this, so that we can complete the merge. I tried to do this myself twice, but I must be missing something, because I keep getting test errors after the rebase. Thanks! |
will show up on the website
Yay it's passing now! Sorry for the delay. This should be ready to merge now. |
I think this should address #322 and #351.
Because I had to move most if
_utils
back intoutils
, sorry I'm the one who broke this in the first place, this PR might seem like a lot, but it should be easier to review by looking at the individual commits. The first two commit are pretty strait forward and the third commit is pretty much just a copy and past.@jchoude could you take a look at the functions that use the
affine
argument and see if we could make it any more clear in the docs that this argument is required.