[BUG]: Correct file reading for AFNI outputs #409
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
CRITICAL
Stale
WIP
bug
concept
coordinate
dataset
dependencies
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
github_actions
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
maintenance
maps
marker
mask
on hold
parcellation
preprocess
question
ready
storage
template-space
triage
wontfix
No milestone
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set
Reference
juaml/junifer!409
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "update/afni-impls"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
This PR updates the interface for AFNI-based markers and also fixes correct output suffices for AFNI outputs depending on NIfTI headers.
Codecov Report
Attention: Patch coverage is
0%with28 linesin your changes missing coverage. Please review.Additional details and impacted files
100.00% <ø> (ø)0.00% <0.00%> (ø)Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
0.00% <ø> (ø)0.00% <ø> (ø)0.00% <0.00%> (ø)0.00% <0.00%> (ø)0.00% <0.00%> (ø)0.00% <0.00%> (ø)@ -148,3 +148,3 @@alff, falff, alff_path, falff_path = estimator.compute( # type: ignoredata=input_data["data"],input_path=input_data["path"],highpass=self.highpass,Is there any reason why we move to paths instead of in-memory data?
@ -148,3 +148,3 @@alff, falff, alff_path, falff_path = estimator.compute( # type: ignoredata=input_data["data"],input_path=input_data["path"],highpass=self.highpass,Passing the path is easier to reason about inside the method and cheaper to hash for the LRU cache.