[Halld-offline] GEANT3 particle IDs

[David Lawrence]

Hi All,

   I have received only positive feedback for this change so I just now 
committed it.
Let me know if you see any issues.

Regards,
-David

On 4/5/13 11:33 AM, David Lawrence wrote:
> Hi Offliners,
>
>    I was just trying to add Pb208 to the list of particles defined in
> particleType.h and ran into an issue. Several particle types have
> been added that extend beyond the original GEANT3 particle ID
> values (which is good). However, when I looked up the GEANT3
> list at the link below, I see there are a number of other particles
> defined, some of which conflict with the new ones added to
> particleType.h. For example, all of the KStar particles with id
> values 65-68 conflict with B10, B11, C12, and N14 in the
> GEANT list.
>
> http://wwwasdoc.web.cern.ch/wwwasdoc/geant/node72.html
>
> Since we don't currently define any of the heavier elements,
> this doesn't present a conflict at the moment. However, it might
> be nice not to have this discrepancy between what we define
> for these values and what the web documentation says. Since all
> code should work off of the enum and NOT have any of these
> hard-coded, then changing the values in particleType for
> should not affect anything.
>
> In a nutshell, I'd like to:
>
> - Change the currently defined particle IDs in particleType.h
>      that have values of 65 or greater to be 100 greater than
>      they are now (e.g. KStar_892_0 will change from being
>      65 to being 165, ...)
>
> - All other values will stay as they are since they are already
>      in alignment with the GEANT documentation
>
> This potentially could affect anyone processing files that
> have these particles defined with the old numbers if
> they try reading them with new code.
>
> It could also break anyone's code that uses hard-coded
> numbers for these (in which case I would feel really,
> really bad ... OK not really. If that happens you kind of
> deserve what you get).
>
> Sorry for the long winded explanation, but I wanted to give
> everyone a chance to object before I checked in this change.
>
> -David
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Halld-offline mailing list
> Halld-offline at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-offline