Feature/multigroup part9 #17
Conversation
| python::module submodule = module.def_submodule( | ||
|
|
||
| "depletion", | ||
| "Depeltion NDI records and subrecords" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed in fix/review-part6
| chunk = Multiplicities( reaction = 16, products = [ 1, 92234 ], | ||
| multiplicities = [ 2, 1 ] ) | ||
|
|
||
| verify_chunk( self, chunk ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should chunk_string also be used here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is used inside the verify_chunk function, but since it is not a keyword record (it is a subrecord) we cannot create this subrecord from a string on the Python side.
| self.assertEqual( self.chunk_typed_string, chunk.to_string() ) | ||
|
|
||
| # verify the record | ||
| self.assertEqual( 'rprod_all', chunk.keyword ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't the type (all) stored somewhere? Should we check that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. the type is stored, and I forgot to test it. That has been changed in fix/review-part6
| @@ -5,6 +5,9 @@ MultigroupTable() : | |||
| metadata_(), primary_structure_(), | |||
| velocities_(), weights_(), total_(), xs_(), scattering_(), | |||
| release_(), primary_heating_(), primary_kerma_(), | |||
| product_multiplicities_all_( depletion::ReactionMultiplicityType::All ), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just for my understanding: all the others are empty parenthesis (default constructor), why do these have something in them?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For these records, we need to know the subtype to construct the full keyword name. This is the same for the nubar records that are introduced in part10.
|
|
||
| if ( this->metadata_.numberReactions().has_value() ) { | ||
|
|
||
| readRecord( this->product_multiplicities_all_, iter, end, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will this be fine is the number of reactions is 0? Or would that never happen?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can the number of reactions actually be zero?
| ReactionMultiplicities() : ReactionMultiplicities( "" ) {} | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * @brief Default constructor |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed in fix/review-part6
| @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ | |||
| static std::string getPostFix( const ReactionMultiplicityType& type ) { | |||
|
|
|||
| return type == ReactionMultiplicityType::All | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What happens if there isn't a postfix or if it isn't all, few, or rmo?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This has been removed in part10
| std::vector< int > data; | ||
| while ( reactions-- ) { | ||
|
|
||
| data.push_back( njoy::tools::disco::FreeFormatInteger::read< int >( iter, end ) ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would you mind adding a comment as to what data this should be reading? Like, the first is the... MT? Second the number of products?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed in fix/review-part6
| * | ||
| * The following verification tests are performed: | ||
| * - there is at least one reaction | ||
| * - the number of groups for each reaction is the same |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed in fix/review-part6
| CHECK( 2 == chunk.reactions()[1].multiplicities()[0] ); | ||
| CHECK( 1 == chunk.reactions()[1].multiplicities()[1] ); | ||
|
|
||
| auto multiplicities = chunk.reaction( 2 ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you mean to use multiplicities rather than chunk.reaction( 2 ) below this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I removed the line in fix/review-part6
This adds the reaction product multiplicity records.