Replace deprecated "_phase" suffix in reproin heuristic with "part-phase" entity

[tsalo]

Closes #769. This is working on DICOMs associated with https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds005250.

Changes proposed:

• Track previous and next sequence info in ReproIn's infotodict.
• Rename s variable to curr_seqinfo for improved clarity. Moved to Rename s variable to curr_seqinfo in reproin heuristic #779.
• For non-SBRef, non-fieldmap scans, set "part" entity to "phase" for phase data instead of setting the suffix to "phase".
• For magnitude non-SBRef, non-fieldmap scans, check if the next sequence has the same series_description and is a phase scan. If it is, set "part" to "mag".

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 90.90909% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 82.15%. Comparing base (a0a3635) to head (59bb2ec).
⚠️ Report is 112 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
heudiconv/heuristics/reproin.py	90.90%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #770      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.08%   82.15%   +0.06%     
==========================================
  Files          42       42              
  Lines        4215     4230      +15     
==========================================
+ Hits         3460     3475      +15     
  Misses        755      755              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[yarikoptic]

Rename s variable to curr_seqinfo for improved clarity.

yeah, but complicates review a little due to diff now including changes I can ignore or not and need to decide when looking...

Could you submit a separate PR with that typo fix and such a rename (so no functionality change) and then let's improve this one -- yet to grasp on all the changes, and as we do not have any nice testing for reproin heuristic, I wonder how we could add one :-/ I would really be shy to accept without some way to test. Locally I could do using smth like https://github.com/nipy/heudiconv/blob/master/utils/test-compare-two-versions.sh but could we do better?!

[tsalo]

👍 I've opened #779 with the variable name change.

[yarikoptic]

Thank you! some feedback to improve it.

[yarikoptic]

is it guaranteed to be the "next", could it be "prior"?

[yarikoptic]

codecov says that this line is not covered, not yet sure how wide implication is ;-)

[yarikoptic]

what does this have to do with phase suffix? nothing in short commit messages hints on possible relation to this change... why is it?

[yarikoptic]

this duplicates that _replace hack 2 more times, causes me duplication-allergy...

Since we are to do that anyways, do it once then -- just in a loop before this loop apply the replacements to all first.

Then avoid that i_acq - do following 'zip'ing, as chatgpt suggested

my_list = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

for previous, current, next in zip([None] + my_list[:-1], my_list, my_list[1:] + [None]):
    print(f"Previous: {previous}, Current: {current}, Next: {next}")

which would avoid all the if's and else's etc and make code easier to read IMHO.

[yarikoptic]

@tsalo -- ping on this. Would you happen to get time to address comments?

[tsalo]

Sorry, I've been really busy. I might have time in the next couple of weeks though.