reachedEE logic

[rovere]

I'm not sure I can follow the logic of reachedEE in this code snippet. To my limited understanding and debugging, the reachedEE==1 case is never a valid one.
Also the hardcoded 160 and 25 are something we should avoid as much as possible.

[artlbv]

If I remember correctly, @beaudett told me that reachedEE = 1 means that the electron hits the barrel. So it does not happen for HGCAL, true, but could still be useful.

[beaudett]

Hello, right, the reachedEE=1 is convenient to know if the the MC particle does not have the HGCAL-related quantites for the obvious reason it is reason it went into the barrel or if it is for a less obvious reason. Florian

…

On 29/08/18 18:18, Artur Lobanov wrote: If I remember correctly, @beaudett <https://github.com/beaudett> told me that |reachedEE = 1| means that the electron hits the barrel. So it does not happen for HGCAL, true, but could still be useful. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#61 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEV5U2AvfM2WK33HiFVu1n65ewvBKXBwks5uVr7RgaJpZM4WRvzN>.

[rovere]

I see. Then, also in this case, I'd get rid (or customise) the hard-coded numbers and also add the reachedEE explanation in the Definitions.md.

[beaudett]

Hi Marco, I suppose that configurable parameters if got enough for an ntupler ? Florian

…

On 30/08/18 06:59, Marco Rovere wrote: I see. Then, also in this case, I'd get rid (or customise) the hard-coded numbers and also add the |reachedEE| explanation in the Definitions.md. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#61 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEV5U83V0EKxPjWQqgn7uOh5gqH5CrpTks5uV3E5gaJpZM4WRvzN>.

[rovere]

@beaudett Yes, I think. I was thinking if there's an easy way of deriving all those constants from the geometry itself since that would really cut the discussion, but I am not sure if it is possible in a generic enough way.
So, config values are definitely ok.

[beaudett]

Hello Marco, I started with the easiest changes. As far as Definitions.md is concerned: https://github.com/beaudett/reco-ntuples/blob/topic_fsimevent2/Definitions.md For the hard-coded values, it is here: beaudett@d08a22d#diff-15765fecaeef229e305b918c8405f57a With the corresponding changes in the config file. beaudett@d08a22d#diff-71cc2d53a5300edc7413159d809d80b8 Now, I must say that I am not so found of overloading the config file parameters that, most probably, nobody is going to change. If you want it this way; no problem. If you agree with me, I could put this parameters as constant values in the code with meaningful names; or I could make them as "invisible" parameters with default values. Let me know what you prefer ! Cheers, Florian

[rovere]

Ciao Florian, thanks a lot! I agree that putting const stuff in the configuration defeats the "configuration" meaning. For the last-layer I very much like the idea that it comes from the conditions, for the radii I really have not strong opinion: I'd see very strange that we will change those numbers ever, so some constexpr values in C++ are equally good. Ciao, -- Marco.

…

___________ Marco Rovere Marco.Rovere@cern.ch CERN EP-CMG | room 40 3-A28 | tel +41227671209 (71209)

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 12:14 PM Florian Beaudette ***@***.***> wrote: Hello Marco, I started with the easiest changes. As far as Definitions.md is concerned: https://github.com/beaudett/reco-ntuples/blob/topic_fsimevent2/Definitions.md For the hard-coded values, it is here: beaudett@d08a22d#diff-15765fecaeef229e305b918c8405f57a With the corresponding changes in the config file. beaudett@d08a22d#diff-71cc2d53a5300edc7413159d809d80b8 Now, I must say that I am not so found of overloading the config file parameters that, most probably, nobody is going to change. If you want it this way; no problem. If you agree with me, I could put this parameters as constant values in the code with meaningful names; or I could make them as "invisible" parameters with default values. Let me know what you prefer ! Cheers, Florian — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#61 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABHaR7XbYUhLjht5nj_SCPBITKqkoeFnks5uXlJCgaJpZM4WRvzN> .