[Rivet] flip3() in FourVector and FourMomentum

[Andy Buckley]

I like it! Thank you, Synonym Man!

Any more thoughts before I switch the code to use reverse()?

Andy



On 01/10/15 08:39, Ben Waugh wrote:
> Would "reverse" be better?
>
> Cheers
> Ben
>
> On 30/09/15 23:27, Andy Buckley wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In testing today I noticed that I'd recently introduced a
>> MissingMomentum problem in the Rivet trunk, by returning the "missing
>> momentum" FourMomentum object as -visibleMomentum(mass=0). I hadn't been
>> switched-on enough to realise that I was multiplying the energy by -1 as
>> well, which of course led to -ve mass2's.
>>
>> Since it's not trivial to just invert the spatial components, I've added
>> a "flip3()" method to FourVector and FourMomentum, which does just that.
>> I'd appreciate a bit of feedback on the API:
>>
>> NAME: I don't love "flip3". But "invert" feels equally ambiguous. So
>> does "reflect". "parity" feels too abstract and would maybe be expected
>> to return a double eigenvalue for something. "negate" sounds to me like
>> "set to zero" rather than "multiply by -1". Any better ideas?
>>
>> RETURN: at the moment I'm making this return a new vector object rather
>> than do the flip in-place and return a reference to *this. This is
>> consistent with the behaviour of operator-. Any thoughts on this? Less
>> important than the name, I think.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andy
>>
>


-- 
Dr Andy Buckley, Lecturer / Royal Society University Research Fellow
Particle Physics Expt Group, University of Glasgow