Proposal for Parameter Sorting in Classes/Functions

Background:

In our current implementation, the parameters for classes/functions are sorted in the following order:

1. Atomgroup (positional)
2. General base parameters (optional, inherited from AnalysisBase
3. Geometric base parameters (optional, inherited from ProfilePlanarBase or similar classes)
4. Module-specific parameters (optional)

Issue:

This ordering may not be optimal for our users, as they often need to modify the module-specific parameters more frequently than the general or geometric base parameters.

Suggestion:

I propose we update the sorting order of parameters to prioritize user needs. The new proposed order is:

1. Atomgroup (positional)
2. Module-specific parameters (optional)
3. Geometric base parameters (optional)
4. General base parameters (optional)

Implementation:

We should ensure that the parameters in the code are sorted in the same way as they are documented. This will maintain consistency and improve usability.