bz_PlotEphys worse than bz_MultiLFPPlot

[brendonw1]

Correct? It seems bz_MultiLFPPlot is much better than bz_plotephys. But to a novice user bz_plotephys.m is the file you'd assume to use. It took me a while to realize there was an alternative and I even started re-doing some code before finding it was already done in bz_MultiLFPPlot.m

I propose we essentially depricate bz_PlotEphys.m by replacing the code in there with a commented referral to bz_MultiLFPPlot.m. Agree?

Later I'd propose we might change the working function to bz_PlotEphys.m (again because better name) and have bz_MultiLFPPlot.m have a commented point to that one... later on.

Thanks

[dlevenstein]

Not sure where PlotEphys came from. Would love to have contributions to bz_MultiLFPPlot.

[brendonw1]

Plot ephys looks about the same - likely an earlier version of multilfpplot tbh.
Maybe then non-controversial to add "For LFP and/or Spike plotting, please use bz_MultiLFPPlot.m" for now at least.
I'll do that unless I get pushback

[dlevenstein]

ah - fine by me

[brendonw1]

It appears that bz_PlotEphys is written by a DLevenstein in 2017... by way :)

[dlevenstein]

😂😂😂 what a goober.