-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
move pvsystem.retrieve_sam to iotools #964
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
Comments
|
I'm in favor of moving it to iotools. I'd like to consider splitting that function into two, to read module and inverter parameters separately. |
I'm not sure what the practical advantage of splitting the function by module/inverter would be. The API would remain the same in that you'd have to specify a string for the specific module/inverter database. I guess we could have different functions for each database. pvlib-python/pvlib/pvsystem.py Lines 1529 to 1547 in f8921bd
|
@cwhanse do you have any further thoughts on how to refactor this function when moving to The |
So far we've named An alternative, we break the pattern and align read functions to the models, which may be more easily recognized by users, e.g., |
I like This would also be a great opportunity to rename parameters to standardization with pvterms. |
I like the consistency of I agree that it makes sense for new functions to return new keys. |
What do people think about moving
pvsystem.retrieve_sam
into theiotools
subpackage? First brought up in #436.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: