Chore/style cleanup utility functions

[dPys]

Summary

This PR focuses on stylistic improvements and cleanup of utility functions.

Goal

Ensure better package maintainability, scalability, and ease of contribution for new developers.

Code Style Adjustments

• Refactored variable names and formatting to improve readability.
• Improved indentation, spacing, and overall syntax compliance with PEP8.

Utility Function Cleanup

• Introduced @assign_algorithms decorator to dynamically assign algorithms to BackendInterface, reducing manual updates and boilerplate.
• Simplified BackendInterface by replacing explicit algorithm declarations with automatic mapping from the ALGORITHMS list.
  • Even ALGORITHMS could be obviated by dynamically retrieving algorithm names directly from the modules using introspection (__str__, dir(), or __dict__), which might be too "auto-magical" for now but worth considering for a future PR.
• Improved ParallelGraph's readability and consistency.
• Reduced documentation and maintenance overhead through a more scalable, dynamic approach to algorithm registration.
• Minor logic refactoring for efficiency.
• Fixed bug in chunking:
  

Removal of Unused Imports/Code

• Eliminated unused imports, reducing code complexity and improving load time.

@dPys

[dPys]

@Schefflera-Arboricola -- all type annotations have now been removed. If there are no other issues, then it might be helpful for us to get this merged sooner rather than later so that I can begin working on some of the other features that we discussed. WDYT?

[dschult]

I don't feel strongly about any of these comments, but these are some suggestions for choices during the style cleanup.

[dPys]

I don't feel strongly about any of these comments, but these are some suggestions for choices during the style cleanup.

Thank you so much for the review! I've committed your formatting suggestions and agree with all of your comments.

[dschult]

What is the program that is creating the .history files? :)

[dschult]

I think we're getting bogged down here in linting land... :(
Can we change the .gitignore file in a separate PR?

I like the changes here to the functions and the tests. Its the style changes that I'm having trouble with.

[dPys]

I think we're getting bogged down here in linting land... :( Can we change the .gitignore file in a separate PR?

Yes, happy to revert the .gitignore to main :) We can address this on a separate PR as well once this PR gets over the finish line.

[dPys]

What is the program that is creating the .history files? :)

The Local History extension of VScode creates .history folders to store automatic backups of your files so you can revert to previous versions, similar to how PyCharm's Local History works.

For now, I can say that if the preference is to be more conservative with what goes into the .gitignore file, then it is no problem for me to just use my local .git/info/exclude file which doesn't get committed to the repo :) With that said, the current .gitignore is missing quite a few common entries (.DS_Store being one of them, as it applies to all MacOS users)

[dschult]

This is basically ready to go as far as I'm concerned.
There are some comments below.

[dPys]

@MridulS -- it seems like removing the ruff dependency with that direct push to main is causing the style / format check to unconditionally fail for all PR's? Was that something that you were planning to revert?

[dschult]

I approve these changes.
@Schefflera-Arboricola can you re-take a look?

[Schefflera-Arboricola]

@MridulS -- it seems like removing the ruff dependency with that direct push to main is causing the style / format check to unconditionally fail for all PR's? Was that something that you were planning to revert?

Can you try moving the update-get-info precommit hook at the end in .pre-commit-config.yaml file in this PR, because that hook internally runs a ruff command and @MridulS removed the ruff dependency. But, I think if we run the ruff hook before update-get-info hook then ruff would be installed in the pre-commit environment for the update-get-info hook to use. I think this should resolve the failing style test. Also, I did the same thing in the PR that @MridulS made but that PR is made from the main branch of nx-parallel so i think that's the reason the style test is passing for the push but not for the pull_request. (PR #84)

for future refernce - CI error msg : _nx_parallel/script.sh: 5: ruff: not found

[Schefflera-Arboricola]

Thank you very much @dPys and @dschult :)

I'm merging this even though the style CI is failing. We can handle that in another PR. This is good to go I think. Thank you again @dPys for putting this together and being so patient :)