Austin Hurst

Hi all, apologies for the slow reply! @sappelhoff, re-reading the docs it looks like PyPREP already defaults to using MNE's filtering re: #107 unless MATLAB equivalence is requested. The filter...

Oh, another quick note on this before I head to bed: the MatPREP CleanLine method is *much* slower than the MNE function PyPREP currently uses. Like, for the tiny test...

> and I am not sure how trivial this will be ... Yep, I'm dreading this one whenever I end up getting around to it. A lot more layers and...

Just noting this for future reference, but in working on #73 I noticed that the default cleanline settings differ between MatPREP and PyPREP: for the former, the size of the...

As an additional note, because bad-by-SNRs are included in the set of "unusable" channels, that means they also get interpolated during re-referencing no matter what, even if they're totally fine...

> Not sure whether something for 0.4 or later - I guess that'd be up to whoever wants to implement this :-) > > Any opinions @yjmantilla ? I guess...

@sappelhoff my idea with option 2 would be to reimplement all the parameters that PyPREP already exposes via `PrepPipeline` for 0.4.0 (e.g. line noise frequencies to remove, reference channels, max....

Whoops, looks like one of the examples relies on an undocumented attribute I removed for the sake of RAM (`self.EEG_new`). Will address that tomorrow.

> It is possible that I introduced these conflicts 😖 it's because I worked on [dbe2062](https://github.com/sappelhoff/pyprep/commit/dbe2062d3c7d50a0d87775e1111062ef854c366f) before pulling `master` ... the pulled master, rebased, and force pushed. That was a...

Okay @sappelhoff, I've gotten the `PrepPipeline` API rewrite to a point I think I'm happy with (though I'd love to hear your thoughts and @yjmantilla's). Some of the attributes aren't...