Refactor umm dict accessors

[jhkennedy]

This is a small PR to refactor dict access so that instad of doing an upfront check for key existance and then accessing it, we use the built in .get method to handle this.

I don't see any value in adding such a minor refactor to the changelog, so I have not updated it, but would be happy to if people feel otherswise.

Pull Request (PR) draft checklist - click to expand

• Please review our
  contributing documentation
  before getting started.
• Populate a descriptive title. For example, instead of "Updated README.md", use a
  title such as "Add testing details to the contributor section of the README".
  Example PRs: #763
• Populate the body of the pull request with:
  • A clear description of the change you are proposing.
  • Links to any issues resolved by this PR with text in the PR description, for
    example closes #1. See
    GitHub docs - Linking a pull request to an issue.
• Update CHANGELOG.md with details about your change in a section titled
  ## Unreleased. If such a section does not exist, please create one. Follow
  Common Changelog for your additions.
  Example PRs: #763
• Update the documentation and/or the README.md with details of changes to the
  earthaccess interface, if any. Consider new environment variables, function names,
  decorators, etc.

Click the "Ready for review" button at the bottom of the "Conversation" tab in GitHub
once these requirements are fulfilled. Don't worry if you see any test failures in
GitHub at this point!

Pull Request (PR) merge checklist - click to expand

Please do your best to complete these requirements! If you need help with any of these
requirements, you can ping the @nsidc/earthaccess-support team in a comment and we
will help you out!

• Add unit tests for any new features.
• Apply formatting and linting autofixes. You can add a GitHub comment in this Pull
  Request containing "pre-commit.ci autofix" to automate this.
• Ensure all automated PR checks (seen at the bottom of the "conversation" tab) pass.
• Get at least one approving review.

[github-actions]

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit 00c8aad

I will automatically update this comment whenever this PR is modified

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit a4b5946

👈 Launch a binder notebook on this branch for commit 5ba8c33

[betolink]

Good to me!

[owenlittlejohns]

I love this clean-up! I'm a big fan of dict.get('key') over dict['key'].

I had two quick comments, but they are kind of out of scope just from me skimming the rest of the file. The landing_page one is likely not an improvement, so definitely feel free to ignore that one.

[owenlittlejohns]

Is it worth doing something with landing_page, too? It'll need to be a bit sneakier where there's a list involved, but maybe something like:

def landing_page(self) -> str:
    return next(iter(collection_results[0]._filter_related_links("LANDING PAGE")), "")

That might not be as readable, though, so feel free to ignore.

[jhkennedy]

I think this is a little harder to reason about the fallback value, at least for me.

I think the most readable form might actually be:

return links[0] if len(links) > 0 else ""

[owenlittlejohns]

Got to love a good ternary. That works for me.

[owenlittlejohns]

Looks good!

[owenlittlejohns]

Got to love a good ternary. That works for me.

[mfisher87]

LGTM! Nice refactor ⭐