i just spent two hours hunting down an error which ultimately turned out
to have to do with the code assuming the wrong units for a variable. i
wonder how many more similar errors are lying deep within our
reconstruction.
at the risk of initiating yet another slew of pointless e-mails, i have to
say, once again, that i really think that we should be using a common set
of units for all variables.
has anyone ever checked the difference in run-time efficiency from working
in, say, microns as opposed to centimeters? on modern computers/compilers
is it even noticeable? if this is the primary reason for working in
different sets of units, then the amount of efficiency gained should be
weighed against the number of hours people will spend debugging unit
errors.
at least, can we all agree to the following:
1. if you write a subroutine that has variables with units passed
into or returned, then please document the expected units at the
beginning of the subroutine.
2. don't place numerical literals directly in the code. for example,
don't place a "2.0" when you could define NS2TDC = 2.0 and use that
instead. products of several literals in the code take some time to
decipher.
3. on the subject of time versus tdc variables, don't include "tdc"
in the name of an honest-to-goodness time variable. this gets
confusing. especially when you then go on to include "t" in the name
of a tdc variable (which is exactly what our reconstruction does
right now (see the TBLWc1Time2Distance class)).
our reconstruction library has now grown to phenominal size. if we don't
start enforcing some coding conventions, it will soon become unfixable.
aaron
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:29 EST