Modernized CTPPSGeometryESModule #26673
Conversation
-added consumes -added fillDescriptions
|
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
Part of #26584 |
|
please test |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-26673/9634
|
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
A new Pull Request was created by @Dr15Jones (Chris Jones) for master. It involves the following packages: Geometry/VeryForwardGeometryBuilder @civanch, @Dr15Jones, @cvuosalo, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
Comparison job queued. |
|
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
|
+1 |
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
geometry-approved
and removed
geometry-pending
pending-signatures
labels
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
| }; | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| //---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ||
| //---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ||
|
|
||
| CTPPSGeometryESModule::CTPPSGeometryESModule(const edm::ParameterSet& iConfig) : | ||
| verbosity_( iConfig.getUntrackedParameter<unsigned int>( "verbosity", 1 ) ), | ||
| compactViewTag_( iConfig.getParameter<std::string>( "compactViewTag" ) ) | ||
| verbosity_( iConfig.getUntrackedParameter<unsigned int>( "verbosity") ), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| verbosity_( iConfig.getUntrackedParameter<unsigned int>( "verbosity") ), | |
| verbosity_{ iConfig.getUntrackedParameter<unsigned int>( "verbosity") }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should the use of braces be consistent in this constructor? Probably not important enough to change at this point.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would expect that in the not too distant future we will use clang-tidy to enforce such stylistic consistency.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From the discussion we have had it is unclear to which extent the clang-tidy braces are reliable for a regular use
|
+1 |
PR description:
-added consumes
-added fillDescriptions
PR validation:
compiles