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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Generalize twtstight for arbitrary beta0 and code refactoring #5174
base: dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Generalize twtstight for arbitrary beta0 and code refactoring #5174
Changes from 1 commit
cbeff6b
8e97a16
9586a84
e6c8b8d
69121cc
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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'm not quite happy with the three functions being mostly duplications of one another with a few switches of sin and cos. It is well annotated and I could follow along quite well but it would be a huge pain to change every definition three times (as I believe you have experienced during this refactoring). Could we make this more elegant? One option could be to extract some common methods for computing the basics at the top, potentially using structured bindings or a shallow struct for the return value. Alternatively, one could think about merging the functions computing and returning all three components (if they are not needed separately).
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 fully agree, as I also spend some thought on it. However, I always postponed it until later. Let us discuss the most suitable approach offline (or in a VC call).
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.
@chillenzer @BrianMarre I just successfully compiled a small proof of concept for the structured bindings within twtstight using 3 variables on both NVIDIA and AMD GPUs.
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
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.
Skimming through this, the same comments apply as for the B field. Even more so, I think we should extract common functions, so we don't have a 6-fold code duplication of round about 70 lines.
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.
See above. Let us discuss this before I make changes.
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
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.
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'll change this.