Change request #1269
Re-organise CTA class names
| Status: | Closed | Start date: | 07/11/2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Due date: | ||
| Assigned To: |  Knödlseder Jürgen | % Done: | 100% | |
| Category: | - | |||
| Target version: | 1.0.0 | |||
| Duration: |
Description
The number of CTA specific classes now becomes pretty large, and we start getting confusion with naming conventions. It thus seem appropriate to re-organise the CTA classes naming conventions before we go to release 1.0.0.
Here a proposal of how to re-organise names:- The response is factorized into Aeff, Psf, Edisp and Background. To make clear that the related classes are part of the Instrument Response Function I’d propose to prepend
Irf, e.g.GCTAIrfAeff,GCTAIrfAeff2D,GCTAIrfAeffArf, ...,GCTAIrfPsf, ...,GCTAIrfEdisp, ...,GCTAIrfBackground. - All CTA specific models start with
GCTAModel(already implemented@ - All cube-style specific classes start with
GCTACube, e.g.GCTACubeExposure,GCTACubePsf,GCTACubeBackground; the only exception would beGCTAEventCubethat derives fromGEventCube
Recurrence
No recurrence.
History
#1
Updated by Knödlseder Jürgen almost 10 years ago
- Target version set to 1.0.0
#2
Updated by Knödlseder Jürgen about 9 years ago
- Assigned To set to Knödlseder Jürgen
- % Done changed from 0 to 50
I did the following changes to class names:
GCTAExposure⇒GCTACubeExposureGCTAMeanPsf⇒GCTACubePsfGCTASourceCube⇒GCTACubeSourceGCTASourceCubeDiffuse⇒GCTACubeSourceDiffuseGCTASourceCubePointSource⇒GCTACubeSourcePoint
I did not rename the other IRF classes to GCTAIrf... as this creates very bulky class names for little gain. Hence only cube analysis classes will get special GCTACube... names to distinguish classes for this analysis type from the other classes.
#3
Updated by Knödlseder Jürgen about 9 years ago
- Status changed from New to Closed
- % Done changed from 50 to 100
Adapt also ctools code and merge changes into devel.