Address differences in ROOT5 and ROOT6 interfaces #47

plexoos · 2021-06-30T20:39:02Z

The main idea behind the proposed changes is to have the code that can seamlessly work with ROOT5 and ROOT6

The wrapper function `TH1Helper::SetCanRebin(TH1 *h,int axis=0)` is introduced in c0bf719 See StRoot/StarRoot/TH1Helper.h

genevb

The FMS code in StQAMakerBase.cxx was provided to the QA group by people who are no longer in the collaboration. I don't expect this change to have any negative consequences for QA, so I'm ok with approving that one change, but I don't speak for the owners of the other codes.

klendathu2k

Great solution to what is likely to be a common problem in STAR codes.

The type of `TListIter::fCursor` and `TListIter::fCurCursor` (inherited by `StFileIter`) changes from `TObjLink*` to `std::shared_ptr<TObjLink>` in ROOT5 and ROOT6 respectively. In order to solve the problem with assignment operator we introduce a couple of overloads one of which is selected based on the actual type of the respective data members in `TListIter`.

`TH2* TH2::Rebin(...)` was introduced in ROOT6 overriding `TH1* TH1::Rebin(...)` It seems safe if we use covariant (`TH2*`) with the original return type (`TH1*`) for `TH2* StMultiH1F::Rebin(...)`

In ROOT6 the global pointer `TVirtualMC* gMC` was replaced by a macro `#define gMC (TVirtualMC::GetMC())` causing a compile time error when assigning to `gMC` I think is is safe to remove the assignment for the following reasons: - `TGeant3TGeo`, inheriting from `TVirtualMC`, is a singleton managing the global pointer `gMC` internally - `StarVMC/GeoTestMaker` is excluded from the build - `StarVMC/StarBASE` appears to be used only by an expert tool `StarVMC/StarBASE/macros/starbase.py`

plexoos · 2021-07-01T22:07:20Z

Sorry for adding another commit to this thread but I think it belongs here. I believe TVirtualMC is your domain @klendathu2k and @perevbnlgov

klendathu2k

This should be safe for our code.

It's good to see that ROOT and VMC are cleaning things up a bit. Getting rid of global pointers is a good thing. Singletons aren't much better... but GEANT3 wrappers are likely one of the few places where a singleton pattern makes any sense.

klendathu2k

Looks like it should work. It's also in the cxx file, so not visible external to the module.

klendathu2k

I don't see any mission critical codes which depend on this utility class. I note that TH1::Rebin is virtual in ROOT6, so does this solve a real problem? (I guess there is a compiler warning or other motivation here?) Regardless, don't have any issues with it.

plexoos · 2021-07-02T04:48:19Z

Thanks very much for the feedback Jason ✌️

I note that TH1::Rebin is virtual in ROOT6, so does this solve a real problem? (I guess there is a compiler warning or other motivation here?)

Yes, the introduction of the new TH2* TH2::Rebin in ROOT6 causes a real error about not covariant return type of a virtual function.

#16 3360.1 In file included from .sl88_gcc789/OBJ/StRoot/StUtilities/StMultiH1F.cxx:13:0:
#16 3360.1 .sl88_gcc789/OBJ/StRoot/StUtilities/StMultiH1F.h:38:23: error: invalid covariant return type for 'virtual TH1* StMultiH1F::Rebin(Int_t, const char*, const Double_t*)'
#16 3360.1    virtual        TH1* Rebin(Int_t ngroup, const char* newname, const Double_t* xbins)

The old and new overriding chains are like this:
TH1* TH1::Rebin -> TH1* StMultiH1F::Rebin ✅
vs
TH1* TH1::Rebin -> TH2* TH2::Rebin -> TH1* StMultiH1F::Rebin ❌
TH1* TH1::Rebin -> TH2* TH2::Rebin -> TH2* StMultiH1F::Rebin ✅

genevb · 2021-07-02T15:15:21Z

I see....They added a Rebin() to TH2 in ROOT6 with a (slightly) different return type than the previously-inherited Rebin() from TH1. They didn't add one in TH3, so no impact on StMultiH2F. I don't think I (or anyone else) ever used the returned pointer, so I approve the change to StMultiH1F.h.

genevb · 2021-07-02T17:46:29Z

Hopefully understood, but worth re-iterating: merging any changes like these that have the potential to affect FastOffline should wait until at least a couple weeks after the data-taking ends.

veprbl

I've looked at the changes to StFileIter. The relevant upstream change is root-project/root@b5f8a69#diff-d78120b6a10b89cc75995c1c44f0a347a68f83b1c01cf5fbb3be8c543ec03b55. This PR changes the type and adds wrapper, and that seems to be sufficient.

plexoos · 2021-07-05T16:32:57Z

Hopefully understood, but worth re-iterating: merging any changes like these that have the potential to affect FastOffline should wait until at least a couple weeks after the data-taking ends.

Is there anything that would prevent us from creating a stable branch for fast offline and other online tools that would include only hand picked changes during the run? Sharing a common branch for bleeding edge changes is very common and in fact should be encouraged. On the other hand, preventing incremental development of new features during the run because the online chooses to use an unstable branch does not sound very productive.

genevb · 2021-07-05T19:27:51Z

Hi, Dmitri If the S&C management and others in the Collaboration (e.g. subsystem software coordinators) want DEV to be built from some other branch than "main" during Run operations, we can have a switch for AutoBuild.

…

-Gene

plexoos · 2021-07-06T15:29:58Z

Hi Gene: When you refer to the 'main' branch do you think of it as a stable or development branch? Picking the definition based on a specific time of year is at least confusing.

genevb · 2021-07-08T04:35:25Z

Hi, Dmitri If you're asking my perspective, I personally do not apply these terms to the code repository, but I do to the builds. DEV is a development build that we have leveraged for FastOffline during Run operations because we wanted the rapid code deployment scheme of DEV when necessary to support the Run operations, but that brings the requirement of being careful about what gets inserted by developers into the place from which DEV pulls its code. It is not a perfect scheme, and if you wish to change this established scheme, you need to have a clear proposal for how Run operations will be supported.

…

-Gene On Jul 6, 2021, at 11:30 AM, Dmitri Smirnov ***@***.******@***.***>> wrote: Hi Gene: When you refer to the 'main' branch do you think of it as a stable or development branch? Picking the definition based on a specific time of year is at least confusing.

plexoos · 2021-07-12T16:35:58Z

Gene, the data taking is over. Are you ok with merging these changes now?

plexoos · 2021-07-13T14:52:42Z

If there are no further comments I would like to merge this PR. We need to move on with ROOT6

genevb · 2021-07-13T16:16:58Z

I suggest getting SL21c out the door first. -Gene On Jul 13, 2021, at 10:52 AM, Dmitri Smirnov ***@***.******@***.***>> wrote: If there are no further comments I would like to merge this PR. We need to move on with ROOT6

plexoos · 2021-07-13T16:54:26Z

Good point. Agreed

starsdong · 2021-07-14T18:44:00Z

Gene, can you approve this PR (as you already indicated in the comments)? I think merging will happen automatically later.

genevb · 2021-07-14T19:05:15Z

Gene, can you approve this PR (as you already indicated in the comments)? I think merging will happen automatically later.

Aren't there already 2 approvals? I'd be interested to understand why additional approvals are needed if anyone knows why.

-Gene

plexoos · 2021-07-14T20:16:33Z

Aren't there already 2 approvals? I'd be interested to understand why additional approvals are needed if anyone knows why.

Yes, but to enable the merge button 2 approvals from code owers is required. The code owners are indicated by this shield lock icon

We have the corresponding flag set in the settings:

genevb

Seems to need my approval. I don't have any objections as long as these changes don't get merged into SL21c as we agreed, so here is that approval.

genevb · 2021-07-14T20:38:43Z

to enable the merge button 2 approvals from code owers is required.

That implies that the approvals from Jason and Dmitry K. were meaningless. Correct?

plexoos · 2021-07-14T20:49:33Z

That implies that the approvals from Jason and Dmitry K. were meaningless. Correct?

Can't speak for others but for me it is important to see the reaction from other contributors especially when I know that they spent time looking over the changes. So, definitely not meaningless.

genevb · 2021-07-14T21:03:10Z

Can't speak for others but for me it is important to see the reaction from other contributors especially when I know that they spent time looking over the changes. So, definitely not meaningless.

OK, reasonable point. I agree that I would've withheld my approval if there was lesser support from such others.

plexoos · 2021-07-19T15:54:07Z

Perhaps, I should have mentioned in the closing comment that tagging or branching can be done from any past commit in the existing history. So, any changes on the main branch after the tag or branching point can be ignored

genevb · 2021-07-19T17:57:13Z

Perhaps you could’ve waited just a few more hours (was it that urgent?) as we had agreed. Please let me know how to get the version hash from before today’s merges. Thanks,

…

-Gene On Jul 19, 2021, at 11:54 AM, Dmitri Smirnov ***@***.***> wrote: Perhaps, I should have mentioned in the closing comment that tagging or branching can be done from any past commit in the existing history. So, any changes on the main branch after the tag or branching point can be ignored — You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#47 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AUK2OBPLDNPVVMNC6CFCYRDTYRDCVANCNFSM47TC5DPQ>.

plexoos · 2021-07-19T18:05:41Z

There is no point in waiting if all we want to include in the release is already in the repo
Hashes can be viewed on this web site or with git log
Amol just asked me to help with the tagging. I am going to do it this time. The hash for SL21c tag will be 0d53a1a

veprbl · 2021-07-19T18:27:47Z

We could make what @plexoos suggests to be more formal by designating a stabilization branch that could receive backports for only the release-critical fixes

Use wrapper around TH1 rebin API changed between ROOT5 and ROOT6

2b6cd55

The wrapper function `TH1Helper::SetCanRebin(TH1 *h,int axis=0)` is introduced in c0bf719 See StRoot/StarRoot/TH1Helper.h

plexoos requested review from genevb and nigmatkulov as code owners June 30, 2021 20:39

genevb reviewed Jul 1, 2021

View reviewed changes

plexoos changed the title ~~Use wrapper around TH1 rebin API changed between ROOT5 and ROOT6~~ Address differences in ROOT5 and ROOT6 interfaces Jul 1, 2021

plexoos requested review from perevbnlgov, klendathu2k and veprbl July 1, 2021 17:31

klendathu2k approved these changes Jul 1, 2021

View reviewed changes

plexoos added 3 commits July 1, 2021 17:47

Use covariant return type due to updated TH2 API in ROOT6

55c0e4c

`TH2* TH2::Rebin(...)` was introduced in ROOT6 overriding `TH1* TH1::Rebin(...)` It seems safe if we use covariant (`TH2*`) with the original return type (`TH1*`) for `TH2* StMultiH1F::Rebin(...)`

plexoos force-pushed the ds-pre-root6 branch from a7a34e6 to 4afb136 Compare July 1, 2021 22:04

klendathu2k approved these changes Jul 1, 2021

View reviewed changes

plexoos mentioned this pull request Jul 2, 2021

Add CI build based on ROOT6 #50

Merged

veprbl approved these changes Jul 3, 2021

View reviewed changes

plexoos mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2021

Star6 #56

Closed

genevb approved these changes Jul 14, 2021

View reviewed changes

plexoos merged commit a6ab26a into main Jul 19, 2021

plexoos deleted the ds-pre-root6 branch July 19, 2021 15:48

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Address differences in ROOT5 and ROOT6 interfaces #47

Address differences in ROOT5 and ROOT6 interfaces #47

plexoos commented Jun 30, 2021 •

edited

genevb left a comment •

edited

klendathu2k left a comment

plexoos commented Jul 1, 2021

klendathu2k left a comment

klendathu2k left a comment

klendathu2k left a comment

plexoos commented Jul 2, 2021 •

edited

genevb commented Jul 2, 2021 •

edited

genevb commented Jul 2, 2021

veprbl left a comment

plexoos commented Jul 5, 2021

genevb commented Jul 5, 2021 via email

plexoos commented Jul 6, 2021

genevb commented Jul 8, 2021 via email

plexoos commented Jul 12, 2021

plexoos commented Jul 13, 2021

genevb commented Jul 13, 2021 via email

plexoos commented Jul 13, 2021

starsdong commented Jul 14, 2021

genevb commented Jul 14, 2021

plexoos commented Jul 14, 2021

genevb left a comment

genevb commented Jul 14, 2021

plexoos commented Jul 14, 2021

genevb commented Jul 14, 2021

plexoos commented Jul 19, 2021

genevb commented Jul 19, 2021 via email

plexoos commented Jul 19, 2021

veprbl commented Jul 19, 2021

Address differences in ROOT5 and ROOT6 interfaces #47

Address differences in ROOT5 and ROOT6 interfaces #47

Conversation

plexoos commented Jun 30, 2021 • edited

genevb left a comment • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

klendathu2k left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

plexoos commented Jul 1, 2021

klendathu2k left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

klendathu2k left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

klendathu2k left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

plexoos commented Jul 2, 2021 • edited

genevb commented Jul 2, 2021 • edited

genevb commented Jul 2, 2021

veprbl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

plexoos commented Jul 5, 2021

genevb commented Jul 5, 2021 via email

plexoos commented Jul 6, 2021

genevb commented Jul 8, 2021 via email

plexoos commented Jul 12, 2021

plexoos commented Jul 13, 2021

genevb commented Jul 13, 2021 via email

plexoos commented Jul 13, 2021

starsdong commented Jul 14, 2021

genevb commented Jul 14, 2021

plexoos commented Jul 14, 2021

genevb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

genevb commented Jul 14, 2021

plexoos commented Jul 14, 2021

genevb commented Jul 14, 2021

plexoos commented Jul 19, 2021

genevb commented Jul 19, 2021 via email

plexoos commented Jul 19, 2021

veprbl commented Jul 19, 2021

plexoos commented Jun 30, 2021 •

edited

genevb left a comment •

edited

plexoos commented Jul 2, 2021 •

edited

genevb commented Jul 2, 2021 •

edited