Make particle size distribution work with composite electrode.

[aabills]

Description

Makes particle size distribution work with composite electrode.

Test is a bit weird, the standard model test fails due to some shape error -- I'll debug that tomorrow.

Type of change

Please add a line in the relevant section of CHANGELOG.md to document the change (include PR #) - note reverse order of PR #s. If necessary, also add to the list of breaking changes.

• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Optimization (back-end change that speeds up the code)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Key checklist:

• No style issues: $ pre-commit run (or $ nox -s pre-commit) (see CONTRIBUTING.md for how to set this up to run automatically when committing locally, in just two lines of code)
• All tests pass: $ python -m pytest (or $ nox -s tests)
• The documentation builds: $ python -m pytest --doctest-plus src (or $ nox -s doctests)

You can run integration tests, unit tests, and doctests together at once, using $ nox -s quick.

Further checks:

• Code is commented, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• Tests added that prove fix is effective or that feature works

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.22%. Comparing base (84fd342) to head (a7253b8).
Report is 121 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #4687   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    99.22%   99.22%           
========================================
  Files          302      303    +1     
  Lines        23000    23070   +70     
========================================
+ Hits         22821    22891   +70     
  Misses         179      179           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[review-notebook-app]

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

---

Powered by ReviewNB

[valentinsulzer]

Generally looks fine to me, the proof will be in the testing and coverage. A lot of places have unnecessarily duplicated code but not a hill I'll die on

[aabills]

s/b gtg

[rtimms]

thanks @aabills looks great, just a few minor comments

[rtimms]

FYI geo.domain_params["negative"] is equivalent to geo.n

[aabills]

I'm not sure how to interpret this comment, as far as I can tell, I never use geo.domain_params['negative']. Is there something here you want changed?

[rtimms]

sorry I wasn’t clear. I meant that instead of doing an if statement by domain and getting eg geo.n you can do geo.domain_params[domain]. More of a comment then necessarily a suggestion / required change.

[rtimms]

looks like I left this comment in the wrong place too lol

[aabills]

sounds good, thanks