Hi Jan,
That's not a bad idea. For one or two kinds of calibration it would
probably be overkill, but if we want to leave open the option to
generalize this later that would be a good way to do it. Dunno...
Cheers,
Mat.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 05:02:59PM -0800, Jan Strube wrote:
> Hi Mat,
>
> this looks like it should make use of the Java 1.5 Generics.
> Unfortunately the implementation would have to suffer and probably do
> something nasty like RTTI behind the curtains, but it would clean up the
> interface.
>
> I'd have to refresh my memory how to do it exactly, but you can have a
> look here:
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5/pdf/generics-tutorial.pdf
>
> I think I can dig out some example somewhere.
>
> Cheers,
> Jan
>
>
> Matthew John Charles wrote:
> >Hello all. This is mildly related to the discussion in today's meeting.
> >
> >I think it would be good to have a general interface for energy
> >calibration, so that reconstruction code can be decoupled from
> >all the fiddly aspects of energy calibration code. I suggest two
> >interfaces:
> >
> > org.lcsim.util.event.ParticleEnergyCalibration
> > org.lcsim.util.event.ClusterEnergyCalibration
> >
> >which would look like:
> >
> > public interface ParticleEnergyCalibration {
> > public double energy(ReconstructedParticle part);
> > }
> >
> > public interface ClusterEnergyCalibration {
> > public double energy(Cluster clus);
> > }
> >
> >Thoughts?
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Mat.
> >
>
>
> --
> Jan F. Strube -- University of Oregon
> Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
> bldg. 48, rm. 244, MS 35
> (650) 926-2913 phone
> 8522 fax
>
|