Emily Cassidy's .ipynb and.py for review of ndvi automation code. #25

[mthomp89]

**Review Checklist

CI Checks

The notebook runs from start to finish on all operating systems:**

• Mac
• Windows
• Linux

👍 Great use of the os module throughout. 👍

Reproducibility

• Are the data downloaded in the code
• Are paths created to ensure they work on all operating systems (using os.path.join)
• Are comments used to clarify the contents of the code that can’t be clarified using expressive variable and function names alone? (not too many comments - just enough)
• Does the notebook run from start to finish?

PEP 8 standards & Code Readability

Functions

• Do functions follow PEP 8 format conventions?
• Are function docstrings clear (all inputs and outputs clearly described and defined
• Are function names expressive (the name describes what the function does)?
• Are functions easy to understand and read?
• How many tasks does each function do? (ideally a function does one thing well).

Package imports

• Are standard modules (those included with the base python install) vs. third party (related but externally developed tools) import groups correct with appropriate spacing in between each group?
• Are variable names throughout the code, expressive?
• Suggest changes if not, highlight what was done well
• Is the code overall easy to understand and read? Are there things that would make it more clear / cleaner?

DRY Code

• Are segments of code repeated in the file or is the code DRY?
• Are loops used to optimize DRY code?
• Are functions used to optimize DRY code?
• Are there any areas that could be potentially improved (you can suggest improvements OR you can just highlight parts of the code where you suspect it could be cleaner / more efficient.

Novel Approaches to Problem solving

• Highlight any novel approaches to completing the assignment.

See [inline comments on the pull request](emily cassidy's .ipynb and.py for review of ndvi automation code. #25).