Add capability to created wanted variables list with an explicit list of paths

[andypbarrett]

This pull request adds the capability to the Variables.append method to create wanted variables using a list of explicit paths.

• a path_list keyword argument was added to append.
• parse_var_list and set are used to generate unique var_list, beam_list, keyword_list variables. These are then used as they had been in the original version of append.
• the docstring for append was updated to describe the new keyword and give a usage example.
• keyword checking is added to ensure path_list but not var_list, beam_list, or keyword_list are set. A ValueError is raised if this check fails.
• The check that at least one combination of keywords is set was updated to include path_list and is modified to use if instead of assert. This allows a more informative Exception to be raised than an AssertionError

[github-actions]

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit 1342525

I will automatically update this comment whenever this PR is modified

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit acb5a52

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit 4dd740b

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit 7603309

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit 4054e1f

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit 4824bd4

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit 1d868bd

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit e294e31

[rwegener2]

Looks good to me! Thanks, @andypbarrett (especially for updating the docstring with an example, too!)

[JessicaS11]

Thanks for the great PR, @andypbarrett! My comments are mostly typos, and hopefully a fix to get the tests via Travis to pass.

[andypbarrett]

Thanks @JessicaS11 and @rwegener2 . I plan on fixing these on Thursday 15 Feb.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 10.00000% with 9 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 66.02%. Comparing base (de13727) to head (e294e31).
⚠️ Report is 134 commits behind head on development.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
icepyx/core/variables.py	10.00%	9 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff               @@
##           development     #508      +/-   ##
===============================================
- Coverage        66.19%   66.02%   -0.18%     
===============================================
  Files               36       36              
  Lines             3065     3073       +8     
  Branches           541      544       +3     
===============================================
  Hits              2029     2029              
- Misses             945      953       +8     
  Partials            91       91              

☔ 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.

[JessicaS11]

I went to add the new example in the docstring to the variables tutorial notebook it raised 2 issues:

1. The example fails because it's for ATL03, and the examples are on ATL06 (and in the notebook, there's a second one for ATL09)
2. Trying to use a path_list input on ATL06 fails because it's got four layers of variables, not the three we collect here.

I haven't reminded myself of how we handle this in general in the module, so that may recommend a solution for (2). (1) is easy if we just sub in another list.

[review-notebook-app]

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

---

Powered by ReviewNB