We have some kind of convetion to empoy ii for iteraion / count variables,
this also is more complitant with the python debugger. Take a look around
and you will finde it everywhere. Actually I proposed this as an
improvement over my previous version (master) which employs i. Makes sense?


On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 4:28 PM, mainakjas <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> In mne/preprocessing/ica.py:
>
> > -        # set channel names and info
> > -        ch_names = out.info['ch_names'] = []
> > -        ch_info = out.info['chs'] = []
> > -        for i in xrange(self.n_components_):
> > -            ch_names.append('ICA %03d' % (i + 1))
> > -            ch_info.append(dict(ch_name='ICA %03d' % (i + 1), cal=1,
> > -                logno=i + 1, coil_type=FIFF.FIFFV_COIL_NONE,
> > +        self._ica_export_info(out.info, raw, picks)
> > +
> > +        return out
> > +
> > +    def _ica_export_info(self, info, container, picks):
> > +            # set channel names and info
> > +        ch_names = info['ch_names'] = []
> > +        ch_info = info['chs'] = []
> > +        for ii in xrange(self.n_components_):
>
> just wondering if ii is an informative variable name. Something like
> i_components might be better?
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/mne-tools/mne-python/pull/540/files#r3596619>
> .
>