cleaned up code in helper.py forecast_to_json()

[n-strong]

General:

• Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?

Code:

1. Does your submission pass tests?
2. Have you run the linter/formatter on your code locally before submission?
3. Have you added an explanation of what your changes do?

I replaced range(len(...)) loops with enumerate() in forecast_to_json() and made the method more pythonic. Functionality remains the same.

Summary by Sourcery

Enhancements:

• Refactor forecast_to_json() in helper.py to use enumerate() instead of range(len(...)) for improved readability and Pythonic style.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide by Sourcery

The changes focus on improving the readability and efficiency of the forecast_to_json() function by adopting more Pythonic practices. The main implementation change replaces a traditional range-based loop with Python's enumerate() function, and restructures the dictionary creation and appending process to be more concise.

No diagrams generated as the changes look simple and do not need a visual representation.

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Refactored loop structure and dictionary handling in forecast data processing	Replaced range(len()) loop with enumerate() for more Pythonic iteration Simplified dictionary creation by directly appending to list instead of creating intermediate variable Improved code formatting for better readability of nested function calls Removed redundant docstring as the function name is self-descriptive	src/helper.py

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time. You can also use
  this command to specify where the summary should be inserted.

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[github-actions]

👋 Hi! Thanks for submitting your first pull request!
• We appreciate your effort to improve this project.
• If you're enjoying your experience, please consider giving us a star ⭐
• It helps us grow and motivates us to keep improving! 🚀

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @n-strong - I've reviewed your changes - here's some feedback:

Overall Comments:

• Please restore the removed docstring that describes the function's purpose and parameters. Documentation is important for maintainability.

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟢 General issues: all looks good
• 🟢 Security: all looks good
• 🟢 Testing: all looks good
• 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
• 🟢 Documentation: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}

[ryansurf]

Hey @n-strong, sorry I haven't reviewed this yet, haven't had access to my laptop. I'll be able to this next week coming up🤙 looks good

Saw you have some surf projects yourself, nice

[ryansurf]

Hey @n-strong, looks good! Looks cleaner now, especially the for loop. I left a comment asking about the removal of the docstring but everything else looks great.

Also, the linter failed. This should be an easy fix as its complaining about some whitespace. Checkout the makefile or refer to the docs here to see how to do this (just runingn make lint && make format should do the trick). Can you fix this?

Edit: Actually, I agree with removing the docstring. The function name is self-descriptive

[ryansurf]

Any reason you removed the docstring?