changed Point -> Coord in neighbor lists

[zerothi]

I just stumpled on this, @pfebrer comments?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 72.22222% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 86.93%. Comparing base (1a74fd1) to head (569ca17).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/sisl/geom/_neighbors/tests/test_finder.py	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
src/sisl/geom/_neighbors/_neighborlists.py	92.30%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #917   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   86.93%   86.93%           
=======================================
  Files         408      408           
  Lines       53833    53836    +3     
=======================================
+ Hits        46802    46805    +3     
  Misses       7031     7031           

☔ 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.

[pfebrer]

Why do you want it like this? It looks worse to me

[zerothi]

Agreed, but when building the docs, I get errors on missing attribute docs.... This is the PEP suggested way of adding docs-strings to attributes.

[pfebrer]

Hmm this is very strange, last time I checked sphinx took the documentation from the previous line's comment if it started with #:. This is no longer true?

[zerothi]

well, all I can say is that I get lots of errors building the docs, and in particular these ones pop up. With this, it gets fixed.

[zerothi]

Perhaps #: only works for module attributes (constants), and not class attributes. It isn't fully clear to me either, because in constant.py I do #:, and I don't get errors there!

[pfebrer]

It is just a matter of preference, so if you prefer it like this it is fine for me. Personally I don't have a preference for one or the other, but I do think that changing names in the public API should not be done lightly. So if you think it really makes much more sense, then OK, but if not I would keep it as is.

[zerothi]

It is just a matter of preference, so if you prefer it like this it is fine for me. Personally I don't have a preference for one or the other, but I do think that changing names in the public API should not be done lightly. So if you think it really makes much more sense, then OK, but if not I would keep it as is.

Thats why I would do it rather soonish, it hasn't been picked up yet. So better now than in some months/years.