Draft: Pixel detector model class
This MR proposes the following changes to the detector model tree
- Making the base
DetectorModel
class more abstract:- removing parts of the ctor that handle pixel-specific configuration keys (eg.
number_of_pixels
). The ctor now only looks for model-inspecific parameters such astype
orsensor_thickness
and support structure parameters. -
An open question on my part: Class members have been renamed to not use the word "pixel" to have more abstractness even in the naming convention. Currently "pixel" has been substituted for a more generic "cell" (
number_of_pixels_
tonumber_of_cells_
and so on). I realize the primary object is still calledAllpix::Pixel
, but in my opinion it doesn't make a lot of sense to rename that as well. Please let me know if you want to keep this change, use a different word or revert it back.
- removing parts of the ctor that handle pixel-specific configuration keys (eg.
- Introducing
PixelDetectorModel
class which inherits fromDetectorModel
and handles the pixel-specific parameters. This is basically the originalDetectorModel
implementation with the caveat that most of the methods are already implemented in the base class (as these are virtual there had to be something in the base class and it makes sense to me to use the implementation most likely to be called, even though it reduces the abstractness). - Changing derived pixel model classes to inherit from
PixelDetectorModel
instead of the base class.
(These changes result from discussion on !528 (closed))
Edited by Radek Privara