handle list of attr_name in apply/get raster data

[wang-boyu]

This PR improves RasterLayer’s band handling by allowing multiple raster bands to be mapped to cell attribute names.

It extends RasterLayer.apply_raster() / RasterLayer.get_raster() / RasterLayer.from_file() / RasterLayer.to_file() to support multi-band rasters while keeping existing single-band usage unchanged.

Motivation

Mesa-Geo currently assumes raster values map to a single attribute name, which is limiting when reading multi-band datasets (e.g., RGB, multispectral, multiple variables). Users need to manually split bands and call apply_raster() repeatedly.

This PR provides a more convenient way to name and retrieve multi-band rasters.

Changes

Updated API behavior

RasterLayer.apply_raster(data, attr_name=...)

• Single-band (data.shape == (1, H, W)):

  • attr_name: str behaves as before (creates one attribute).
  • attr_name: None auto-generates an attribute name (existing behavior).

• Multi-band (data.shape == (B, H, W)):

  • attr_name: list[str] assigns one attribute name per band (length must equal B).
  • attr_name: str uses it as a base name and creates per-band attributes (e.g., elevation_1, elevation_2, ...).
  • attr_name: None auto-generates band names.

RasterLayer.get_raster(attr_name=...)

• attr_name: str returns a single band as (1, H, W) (as before).
• attr_name: list[str] returns selected bands stacked as (B, H, W) in the provided name order.
• attr_name: None returns all stored raster attributes stacked as (B, H, W).

RasterLayer.from_file(..., attr_name=...) and RasterLayer.to_file(..., attr_name=...)

from_file() and to_file() now supports the same attr_name options as apply_raster() for multi-band rasters.

Validation

• Raises a ValueError when attr_name is a list but its length does not match the number of bands in data.

Backward compatibility

• Existing single-band workflows using attr_name: str | None continue to work unchanged.
• No changes required for callers that only use single-band rasters.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

• 🔍 Trigger a full review

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 92.85714% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 78.08%. Comparing base (77200e8) to head (c6fe3c4).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
mesa_geo/raster_layers.py	92.85%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #303      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   76.34%   78.08%   +1.73%     
==========================================
  Files          10       10              
  Lines         909      940      +31     
  Branches      133      144      +11     
==========================================
+ Hits          694      734      +40     
+ Misses        179      169      -10     
- Partials       36       37       +1     

☔ 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.

[EwoutH]

Didn’t review the code, but I think the API is sensibel

[wang-boyu]

Thanks!