GSI Forum: Tracking » Charge in FairTrackPar and GeaneTrackRep

Home » PANDA » PandaRoot » Tracking » Charge in FairTrackPar and GeaneTrackRep

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Charge in FairTrackPar and GeaneTrackRep [message #11112]

Fri, 22 October 2010 06:11

StefanoSpataro
Messages: 2736
Registered: June 2005
Location: Torino

first-grade participant

From: 140.109.130*

Hi,
I have seen that in the constructors of FairTrackPar and GeaneTrackRep the charge is defined as integer and double respectively.
This leaves the following warning:

/.../trunk/GenfitTools/trackrep/GeaneTrackRep/GeaneTrackRep.cxx:53: warning: passing 'double' for argument 5 to 'FairTrackParP::FairTrackParP(TVector3, TVector3, TVector3, TVector3, Int_t, TVector3, TVector3, TVector3)'

and not only, due to the following lines:

GeaneTrackRep::GeaneTrackRep(FairGeanePro* geane,
                             const GFDetPlane& plane,
                             const TVector3& mom,
                             const TVector3& poserr,
                             const TVector3& momerr,
                             double q,
                             int PDGCode)
  : GFAbsTrackRep(5), _geane(geane), _pdg(PDGCode), _backw(0)
{
  FairTrackParP par(plane.getO(),mom,poserr,momerr,q,plane.getO(),plane.getU(),plane.getV());

(5th parameter -> q).
I think both objects should use the same kind of variable, to be much less "error prone". Indeed, the conversion from double to integer is dangerous:

int(0.9999999) = 0

I think this is quite important! Even other tracking codes should be changed to use a common standard for the particle charge, by substitution of all the current conversions (once fixed if it is better to use int or double).

Report message to a moderator

Re: Charge in FairTrackPar and GeaneTrackRep [message #11113 is a reply to message #11112]

Fri, 22 October 2010 06:16

Anonymous Poster

From: *aspublic.wlan.sinica.edu.tw

Hi,

in principle the charge could be eliminated from the ctor of GeaneTrackRep, since it is fixed by the PDG id.

I am not sure what is the better choice for the charge (int vs. double). I guess int is enough. I absolutely agree that we should fix it to one of them.

Cheers, Christian

Report message to a moderator

Re: Charge in FairTrackPar and GeaneTrackRep [message #11114 is a reply to message #11113]

Fri, 22 October 2010 10:24

Lia Lavezzi
Messages: 291
Registered: May 2007
Location: Torino

first-grade participant

From: *pv.infn.it

Hi,
I remember some time ago it was decided to use the integer for the charge in geane interface and, in trackbase, all the double were changed to int with the function TMath::Sign, e.g.:
fq = (int)TMath::Sign(1.0, fQp);
to avoid bad conversions.
Ciao,
Lia.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Charge in FairTrackPar and GeaneTrackRep [message #11118 is a reply to message #11114]

Sun, 24 October 2010 05:41

StefanoSpataro
Messages: 2736
Registered: June 2005
Location: Torino

first-grade participant

From: 219.238.111*

Then we could modify GeaneTrackRep in order to get an integer, or maybe it would be better to put the proper conversion in the "double" constructor and add a new GeaneTrackRep constructor which takes also integer charge, in order to have no need of modifications in other parts of the code (we should be double-safe in this case).

Report message to a moderator

Re: Charge in FairTrackPar and GeaneTrackRep [message #11125 is a reply to message #11118]

Wed, 27 October 2010 11:26

StefanoSpataro
Messages: 2736
Registered: June 2005
Location: Torino

first-grade participant

From: *vpn.unito.it

Hi,
I have committed the code in svn, so that we have a "proper" double constructur (uwing TMath::Sign), and also a int constructor.
If you don't like this solution, just scream!

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	Geometry of STT
Next Topic:	Bug in PndGenfitAdapters

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sun Apr 28 15:19:26 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01009 seconds