Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.85%. Comparing base (c045e6e) to head (24a8bb5).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #445   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.84%   99.85%           
=======================================
  Files         114      115    +1     
  Lines        9258     9337   +79     
=======================================
+ Hits         9244     9323   +79     
  Misses         14       14           

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

Looks great! One general suggestion: it would be beneficial to enhance the class naming conventions in the IO module down the road as we're expanding IO capabilities to DSS and DTS formats. This would be particularly useful in the homepage documentation helping users quickly know if their data type/format of interest is implemented.

Yes, this is probably a good idea. However, from what I can tell, the other Neubrex file format (currently used for DSS and DTS at forge) would have worked just fine for DAS data as well. I am not 100% sure if they have different formats for DAS and DTS or maybe they just have different formats that are sometimes used for either, or maybe they are just different versions of the same format?

I really wish everyone would include a name of the file format and a version code in the headers so we don't have to guess at these things.

I am dragging my feet a bit on merging this until I have some more time to think about it. If anyone knows someone at Neubrex that would be willing to help us figure out the best approach here that would be useful.

Derrick, I'm about to respond to you over mail, with comments on our (Neubrex) format. Both RFS and DAS.

Hi @arturguzik, I got your email. I will take a closer look in the next few days and get back to you if I have any questions. Thanks in advance for the help.