Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

refactor: Clean navigator state creation #4070

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 6, 2025

Conversation

andiwand
Copy link
Contributor

@andiwand andiwand commented Feb 4, 2025

Minor change - cleans out the navigator state creation a bit

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor

    • Streamlined the navigation state initialization by consolidating how certain key attributes are set. This update improves consistency and clarity in the navigation process.
  • Tests

    • Updated unit tests to align with the revised state initialization, ensuring reliable verification of navigation behavior.

@andiwand andiwand added this to the next milestone Feb 4, 2025
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 4, 2025

Walkthrough

Changed, the initialization process has been. In both the Navigator and TryAllNavigator classes, setting of startSurface and targetSurface is shifted from the state-creation phase (via makeState) to the initialization phase (initialize). Updated, the tests now reflect assignments from state.options rather than direct state assignments. Consolidated the logic, these changes have, ensuring the surfaces are set later during navigation initialization, hmmm.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
Core/include/Acts/Propagator/Navigator.hpp
Core/include/Acts/Propagator/TryAllNavigator.hpp
Removed direct assignment of startSurface and targetSurface from makeState; now set within the initialize method using values from state.options.
Tests/UnitTests/Core/Propagator/NavigatorTests.cpp Updated tests to validate surface assignments via state.options instead of assigning directly to state.startSurface and state.targetSurface.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Caller as Caller
    participant Navigator as Navigator
    participant State as State Object

    Caller->>Navigator: makeState(options)
    Note right of Navigator: Create state without surface assignments
    Navigator-->>Caller: state
    Caller->>Navigator: initialize(state, position, direction, propDir)
    Navigator->>State: Set startSurface & targetSurface from state.options
    Note right of State: Surfaces now initialized
Loading
sequenceDiagram
    participant Caller as Caller
    participant TryAllNav as TryAllNavigatorBase
    participant State as State Object

    Caller->>TryAllNav: makeState(options)
    Note right of TryAllNav: Create state without surface assignments
    TryAllNav-->>Caller: state
    Caller->>TryAllNav: initialize(state, ...)
    TryAllNav->>State: Assign surfaces via state.options
    Note right of State: Surfaces now set
Loading

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

Track Finding, Track Fitting, Changes Performance

Suggested reviewers

  • paulgessinger

Poem

Changed, our code has, in subtle flow,
Surfaces now set when navigators go.
In initialize, clarity we find,
Like stars aligned in the Force, combined.
Code, strong and wise it shall grow!

Tip

🌐 Web search-backed reviews and chat
  • We have enabled web search-based reviews and chat for all users. This feature allows CodeRabbit to access the latest documentation and information on the web.
  • You can disable this feature by setting web_search: false in the knowledge_base settings.
  • Please share any feedback in the Discord discussion.

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 19a4a04 and d74f497.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • Core/include/Acts/Propagator/Navigator.hpp (1 hunks)
  • Core/include/Acts/Propagator/TryAllNavigator.hpp (1 hunks)
  • Tests/UnitTests/Core/Propagator/NavigatorTests.cpp (2 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (10)
  • GitHub Check: merge-sentinel
  • GitHub Check: CI Bridge / build_gnn_tensorrt
  • GitHub Check: unused_files
  • GitHub Check: macos
  • GitHub Check: missing_includes
  • GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu_extra (ubuntu2204, 20, clang++)
  • GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu_extra (ubuntu2204, 20, g++)
  • GitHub Check: build_debug
  • GitHub Check: docs
  • GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu
🔇 Additional comments (4)
Tests/UnitTests/Core/Propagator/NavigatorTests.cpp (2)

191-193: Correct, the initialization of surfaces through options is!

Through state.options now flows the force of surface initialization, hmmmm. Aligned with the new way of navigator state creation, this change is.


211-212: Wise, this test case is!

Verifies that setting only the start surface through options, it does. A good test case for partial initialization, this is.

Core/include/Acts/Propagator/Navigator.hpp (1)

280-282: Cleaner and more logical, this initialization flow is!

To initialize method, moved the surface initialization has been. Benefits, these changes bring:

  • After state reset, initialization occurs
  • In one place, surface initialization now lives
  • More maintainable and clearer, the code becomes
Core/include/Acts/Propagator/TryAllNavigator.hpp (1)

164-166: Consistent with Navigator class, these changes are!

Moved to initialize method, the surface initialization has been. Consistency across navigator implementations, this maintains. Before volume resolution, initialization happens, which logical order follows.

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings (Beta)

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Component - Core Affects the Core module label Feb 4, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2025

📊: Physics performance monitoring for d74f497

Full contents

physmon summary

@andiwand andiwand marked this pull request as ready for review February 5, 2025 16:57
@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot merged commit b94ecd1 into acts-project:main Feb 6, 2025
46 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the automerge label Feb 6, 2025
@andiwand andiwand deleted the clean-navigator-state-creation branch February 6, 2025 08:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component - Core Affects the Core module
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants