Skip to content

DepositionReader: do not require MCParticles to be ordered in ID

Simon Spannagel requested to merge fix_deposit_mcp_order into master

see title. Before we would fail hard in situations where e.g.

Found deposition of 247 e/h pairs, particle ID 11 track id 162 parent track id 4
[...]
Found deposition of 2671 e/h pairs, particle ID 211 track id 4 parent track id 1

the particle would first be referenced and later appear (within the same event of course). I would argue that this is perfectly valid data and putting an additional constraint on the ordering of MCParticles within an event is unnecessary.

Merge request reports