FlatEvtVtxGenerator: do check on R/Phi limits only if UseCylindricalCoords is chosen and other fixes#50946
Conversation
|
type bug-fix |
|
cms-bot internal usage |
|
test parameters:
|
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-50946/49353 |
|
A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich for master. It involves the following packages:
@civanch, @cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
@cmsbuild, please test |
Refactor `FlatEvtVtxGenerator` to improve configuration validation, member initialization, and code clarity. Replace the custom destructor with a defaulted one, reorganize member variables, and initialize common parameters directly in the constructor initializer list. Update `fillDescriptions()` to use conditional parameter validation for Cartesian vs. polar (`FixedR`) configurations, and switch to `std::numbers::pi` for phi defaults. Also improve logging formatting and clean up includes/comments for better readability and maintainability.
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-50946/49354 |
|
Pull request #50946 was updated. @civanch, @cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @mdhildreth can you please check and sign again. |
|
@cmsbuild, please test |
FlatEvtVtxGenerator: do check on R/Phi limits only if fixedR is chosen and other fixesFlatEvtVtxGenerator: do check on R/Phi limits only if UseCylindricalCoords is chosen and other fixes
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-50946/49358 |
|
Pull request #50946 was updated. @civanch, @cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @mdhildreth can you please check and sign again. |
|
@cmsbuild, please test |
|
+1 Size: This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository Comparison SummarySummary:
|
|
+1 |
|
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. @sextonkennedy, @mandrenguyen, @ftenchini (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
|
urgent
|
|
+1 |
PR description:
Title says it all, in response of #50904 (comment).
I profit of this PR to introduce some other modernization.
PR validation:
now runs.
If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:
N/A