ngrenz: code cleonup and optimization of reco track

[ngrenz]

Work intended to optimize the performance of tracker validation code and code cleanup.
Outputs are supposed to be unchanged.

Any comments and suggestions are welcome.
More optimizations will follow.

The changes inside the analyse function are currently not realy big:
instead of

for ( ... ) {
  if (!itTraj->updatedState().isValid()) continue;
  if (itTraj.updatedState().globalMomentum().perp() < 0.5)  continue;
}

here is used

for ( ... ) {
  if (itTraj->updatedState().isValid()) {
    if (itTraj.updatedState().globalMomentum().perp() < 0.5)    continue;
  }
}

and instead of

if (isrechitrphi > 0 || isrechitsas > 0) { 
  if (isrechitrphi > 0) { // fillMEs mono 1 } 
  if (isrechitsas > 0) { //fillMEs stereo 1 } 
  if(iLayerME != LayerMEsMap.end()){ 
    if (isrechitrphi > 0) { // fillMEs mono 2 } 
  } 
  if(iStereoAndMatchedME != StereoAndMatchedMEsMap.end()){ 
    if (isrechitsas > 0) { //fillMEs stereo 2 }
  } 
}

here is used

if (isrechitrphi > 0) { 
  // fillMEs mono 1
  if(iLayerME != LayerMEsMap.end()){ 
    // fillMEs mono 2 
  } 
}
if (isrechitsas > 0) {
  //fillMEs stereo 1
  if(iStereoAndMatchedME != StereoAndMatchedMEsMap.end()){ 
    //fillMEs stereo 2 
  }
}

these changes cover a large area.

The changes in the remaining functions are equivalent to #10973

Thanks for the help

[ngrenz]

@boudoul FYI

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @ngrenz for CMSSW_7_6_X.

ngrenz: code cleonup and optimization of reco track

It involves the following packages:

Validation/RecoTrack

@cmsbuild, @danduggan, @deguio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @cerati, @wmtford, @istaslis, @dgulhan this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[ngrenz]

This is part of the preexisting code.
Here is a logic error and I will correct it in the next pull request for this class.

The problem is that the max from min(rechitpro.clusiz, 4) is 4, therefore the max of the query is

if ( (4 - 1) == 4 )

so this fillME will never be executed

---

Page 13 from this slides list possible solutions:
https://indico.cern.ch/event/394132/session/1/contribution/5/attachments/1140008/1632665/code_cleanup.pdf

[ngrenz]

In addition for the next pull request:
if I am not wrong, the chronological order of the fillME is not
important as long as the first entry is different.

Therefore the result does not change if I write

fillME(simplehitsMEs.meResolxMFAngleProfile,rechitpro.trackangle, sqrt(rechitpro.resolxxMF));
fillME(simplehitsMEs.meResolxMFTrackwidthProfile,rechitpro.trackwidth, sqrt(rechitpro.resolxxMF));

or

fillME(simplehitsMEs.meResolxMFTrackwidthProfile,rechitpro.trackwidth, sqrt(rechitpro.resolxxMF));
fillME(simplehitsMEs.meResolxMFAngleProfile,rechitpro.trackangle, sqrt(rechitpro.resolxxMF));

if I am right, so I can combine some if in the next pull request

[makortel]

const std::string&

[deguio]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #10975 was updated. @cmsbuild, @danduggan, @deguio can you please check and sign again.

[deguio]

+1
provided it passes the tests

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_6_X IBs or unless it breaks tests. This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: bedea98
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10975/8019/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_6_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10975/8019/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_6_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1