-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 201
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add particle weight as an explicit argument for _libwarpx.py::add_particles() #2161
Merged
ax3l
merged 2 commits into
ECP-WarpX:development
from
ModernElectron:add_weight_to_add_particles
Aug 6, 2021
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if we should make those
and
combined, to avoid (silent) returns where one parameter is only set to zero?We have a check for mismatched lengths below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc @dpgrote , what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is tricky because of the default value of parameters. If a user calls
add_particles(electrons, x=newx)
each step to inject particles and on some steps the length ofnewx
is zero, it should return silently. With theor
this is what happens. Usingand
and relying on the length consistency check below would raise an error since the length of the default parameters is 1 and somaxlen
would be 1.Perhaps the default values should be changed to
None
with the argument handling taking that into account. With that it is known which arguments were supplied by the user and the consistency of those can be checked. This would require a fair amount of reworking of this code.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see. I think my confusion just lies into what happens with unprovided parameters. Do we default init those to zero or so?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, parameters not supplied default to
0.
, which has a length of 1. If multiple particles are being added, the zero is broadcast over all of the particles.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If an input parameter has a length of zero, using the default value instead is probably not the correct thing to do. In my example above, if
newx
has a length of zero, using the default value would erroneously add a particle withx=0.
, not the expected result.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, I think I understand now. Yep, I agree that we should do a follow-up to use
=None
as default parameter to make things more clear/Pythonic.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can do that after this PR merges.