[Rivet] New projection method names without "projection"

[Andy Buckley]

Ah, I see!

Anyway, yes we have had feedback that people don't really understand how 
the concept maps to the Rivet code so I think hiding by default is a 
good thing. And if it allows us to have shorter function names without 
losing clarity, that's no bad thing.

I've implemented this on the 2.5 branch now. The one stumbling block was 
with the idea of register(someproj, "SomeName"): 'register' is a C(++) 
keyword, so I think we can't use it as a function name -- right? For now 
I've created aliases for addProjection called both add(...) and 
reg(...): any better ideas, or a preference to drop one? While I prefer 
the name "register" to "add", given that addProjection is being retained 
and that "reg" is not so obvious to remember or interpret, I'm inclined 
to ditch it. Thoughts?

Andy


On 24/05/16 14:17, Leif Lönnblad wrote:
> On 2016-05-24 00:06, Andy Buckley wrote:
>> On 23/05/16 22:31, Frank Siegert wrote:
>
>> I quite like the picture, but a) the algebraic mapping is not exact
>> because you can't actually do P(P(Event))
>
> In fact that was how the original design intended things to work, but it
> was lost along way. Don't quite remember why.
>
> Anyway, I don't mind hiding the word from the users, if they are
> confused by it.
>
>
> /Leif
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rivet mailing list
> Rivet at projects.hepforge.org
> https://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet


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