Skip to content
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

Allow duplicate morphology names #39

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

llandsmeer
Copy link
Collaborator

For the CA1 example, we have multiple cells with id="morphology". Currently these all get overwritten and we end up with a single morphology.nml file. This PR fixes that.

@llandsmeer llandsmeer requested a review from thorstenhater March 9, 2023 15:20
.ok_or_else(|| nml2_error!("Morph has no id"))?;
let cell = node
.parent()
.ok_or(nml2_error!("Morphology has no parent"))?;
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think that's incorrect. You can have this

<morphology id="m1">
  ...
</morphology>
<cell id="c1">
    <morphology id="m1" />
</cell>
<cell id="c0">
    <morphology id="m1" />
</cell>

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thus you need to duplicate morphologies under mrf, allow references in mrf, or rename ids. Your choice ;)

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Horrible. Thanks for spotting... maybe default to a name like 'toplevel_m1' for these?

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the Arbor internal NML2 reader calls them cell morphologies and just plain morphologies.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants