Back to the main page.

Bug 2889 - enhancement-add optional warning for using default values in ft_getopt

Status CLOSED WONTFIX
Reported 2015-05-04 16:18:00 +0200
Modified 2019-08-10 12:41:45 +0200
Product: FieldTrip
Component: core
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
Operating System: Windows
Importance: P5 normal
Assigned to:
URL:
Tags:
Depends on:
Blocks:
See also:

Jim Herring - 2015-05-04 16:18:10 +0200

Add today's FT-meeting we discussed the use of default values for the conductivity of different tissue types in constructing an EEG-volume conduction model. Currently the conductivity values for scalp, skull, and brain default to [1, 1/80, 1] * 0.33 (see http://www.fieldtriptoolbox.org/faq/what_is_the_conductivity_of_the_brain_csf_skull_and_skin_tissue). However, the 'real' conductivity values might differ quite a bit from this default. The default therefore is only an estimation and changing the ratios between the conductance of the different tissue types can change the outcome of the source analysis (e.g. spatial blurring). This lead to the discussion that in cases where we supply a default but the default might not be appropriate in all circumstances we should give a warning that the user should keep this in mind. We therefore agreed that ft_getopt (which assigns defaults if an option is not specified) should have the option to throw a warning if the default is used. Also, it should be possible to set the verbosity of the warning (silent, loose, pedantic)


Robert Oostenveld - 2015-05-05 10:26:08 +0200

for the warnings I suggest we use % ft_default.checkconfig string, can be pedantic, loose, silent (default = 'loose') which in ft_defaults is set as default to 'loose'. I realise now that ft_getop is not an easy one to extend, as it is implemented as mex file...


Jim Herring - 2015-05-06 09:58:08 +0200

Ah I see, well, I'm willing to give it a shot (for didactic reasons). The c-code of ft_getopt doesn't seem too complicated but as I'm not familiar with c-programming (Is it even c, and not c++?) it will take a bit more time.


Jan-Mathijs Schoffelen - 2017-01-17 16:37:57 +0100

It's unclear what the status of this one is, but given the fact that we're severely underpowered in terms of people contributing to fixing issues on bugzilla, Robert and JM have decided to close the low-priority bugs for now. This in order to keep the number of open bugs manageable. Feel free to reopen it, if you are willing to move this one forward towards a more proper resolution.


Robert Oostenveld - 2019-08-10 12:35:32 +0200

This closes a whole series of bugs that have been resolved (either FIXED/WONTFIX/INVALID) for quite some time. If you disagree, please file a new issue on https://github.com/fieldtrip/fieldtrip/issues.


Robert Oostenveld - 2019-08-10 12:41:45 +0200

This closes a whole series of bugs that have been resolved (either FIXED/WONTFIX/INVALID) for quite some time. If you disagree, please file a new issue on https://github.com/fieldtrip/fieldtrip/issues.