[PWGCF] adding new analysis for multiharmonic correlations

[pengchon]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

O2 linter results: ❌ 0 errors, ⚠️ 35 warnings, 🔕 0 disabled

[vkucera]

Duplicate of #16403

[abilandz]

Duplicate of #16403

Dear @vkucera, that one was closed because the student didn't have a fork in sync with the master, and after making a commit, there were merging conflicts. Instead of wrestling with them, we decided to close that PR, sync the fork, and start over with a new and clean PR.

Your comments on 16403 are taken into account in this PR.

Thanks for your understanding!

[abilandz]

@pengchon : The compilation on MacOS-arm is failing due to

/Volumes/build/alice-ci-workdir/o2physics/sw/SOURCES/O2Physics/16457/0/PWGCF/MultiparticleCorrelations/Tasks/multiharmonicCorrelations.cxx:440:11: error: variable 'eta' set but not used [-Werror,-Wunused-but-set-variable] 440 | float eta = 0; | ^ 1 error generated.

Please can you push a new commit with this fix? This one is mandatory.

Also, see if you can fix the remaining 2 errors for O2linter quickly, otherwise address them in the next PR.

Thanks!

[vkucera]

Duplicate of #16403

Dear @vkucera, that one was closed because the student didn't have a fork in sync with the master, and after making a commit, there were merging conflicts. Instead of wrestling with them, we decided to close that PR, sync the fork, and start over with a new and clean PR.

Your comments on 16403 are taken into account in this PR.

Thanks for your understanding!

Dear @abilandz , I understand the problem you were facing, but closing the PR is completely unrelated to it and unnecessary, especially when the new PR is opened from the same branch as the closed one. The student could have just updated his branch and pushed without closing the initial PR. Please avoid the duplication in the future.

[vkucera]

Also I still don't see a single delete statement in the new code.

[abilandz]

Duplicate of #16403

Dear @vkucera, that one was closed because the student didn't have a fork in sync with the master, and after making a commit, there were merging conflicts. Instead of wrestling with them, we decided to close that PR, sync the fork, and start over with a new and clean PR.
Your comments on 16403 are taken into account in this PR.
Thanks for your understanding!

Dear @abilandz , I understand the problem you were facing, but closing the PR is completely unrelated to it and unnecessary, especially when the new PR is opened from the same branch as the closed one. The student could have just updated his branch and pushed without closing the initial PR. Please avoid the duplication in the future.

Dear @vkucera, if nothing else, the new PR is clean, with only 3 necessary commits, since it doesn't include any commits that merely resolve merge conflicts. We could have reverted all commits in the closed PR and continued pushing new commits through that PR, but for us it was easier to do it this way - as you can see, everything worked smoothly with the new PR. And it should be easier now to trace back in the future which particular commit introduced new features (or bugs), if we ever need to find that out.

But based on your feedback, we will try to avoid closing any future PR - as always, thanks for your feedback!

[abilandz]

Also I still don't see a single delete statement in the new code.

Apologies for that, this was skipped most likely accidentally - it's an easy fix and will be done in the next PR.