Code review comment for lp:~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/3.0.1

marco zaro (marco-zaro) wrote :

Hi Olivier,
the test you mentioned below was simply not updated after a change I did.
Now it is passing.

Cheers,

Marco

> On 5 Oct 2018, at 09:48, Olivier Mattelaer <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I run (some of) the test this morning (actually 630 of thoses)
> and this one sounds quite bad:
>
> ERROR: test_generate_fks_ew (tests.unit_tests.fks.test_extra_ew.TestAMCatNLOEW)
> check that the generate command works as expected.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/Users/omattelaer/Documents/workspace/3.0.1/tests/unit_tests/fks/test_extra_ew.py", line 112, in test_generate_fks_ew
> self.assertEqual(set(split), self.interface._fks_multi_proc['splitting_types'])
> File "/Users/omattelaer/Documents/workspace/3.0.1/madgraph/core/base_objects.py", line 69, in __getitem__
> self.is_valid_prop(name) #raise the correct error
> File "/Users/omattelaer/Documents/workspace/3.0.1/madgraph/core/base_objects.py", line 86, in is_valid_prop
> Valid property are %s""" % (name,self.__class__.__name__, self.keys())
> PhysicsObjectError: splitting_types is not a valid property for this object: FKSMultiProcess
>
> Valid property are ['has_isr', 'use_numerical', 'amplitudes', 'born_processes', 'pdgs', 'ignore_six_quark_processes', 'collect_mirror_procs', 'process_definitions', 'OLP', 'real_amplitudes', 'init_lep_split', 'diagram_filter', 'ncores_for_proc_gen', 'has_fsr', 'loop_filter']
>
> some other crashes like this one:
>
> ======================================================================
> FAIL: testIO_test_wprod_fksew (tests.unit_tests.iolibs.test_export_fks.IOExportFKSTest)
> target: SubProcesses/[P0.*\/.+\.(inc|f)]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/Users/omattelaer/Documents/workspace/3.0.1/tests/IOTests.py", line 257, in __wrapper
> testKeys=[(testGroup, newTestName)])
> File "/Users/omattelaer/Documents/workspace/3.0.1/tests/IOTests.py", line 700, in runIOTests
> self.assertFileContains(open(file_path), goal)
> File "/Users/omattelaer/Documents/workspace/3.0.1/tests/IOTests.py", line 389, in assertFileContains
> self.assertEqual(a,b)
> AssertionError: ' CALL FFV1_2(W(1,4),W(1,2),GC_3,DCMPLX(ZERO),W(1,8))' != ' CALL FFV1_2(W(1,4),W(1,2),-GC_4,DCMPLX(ZERO),W(1,8))'
>
>
> Which should be related to model optimization include in 2.6.3. I believe that this is fine (amy does not agree?)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Olivier
>
> On 4 Oct 2018, at 23:24, Olivier Mattelaer <<email address hidden> <mailto:<email address hidden>><mailto:<email address hidden> <mailto:<email address hidden>>>> wrote:
>
> Hi Rikkert,
>
> The display is actually perfect for QED (see below):
>
>
> The following switches determine which programs are run:
> /================== Description ==================|=========== values ===========|================ other options ================\
> | 1. Type of perturbative computation | order = NLO | LO |
> | 2. No MC@[N]LO matching / event generation | fixed_order = ON | No NLO+PS available for EW correction |
> \================================================================================================================================/
> Either type the switch number (1 to 6) to change its setting,
> Set any switch explicitly (e.g. type 'madspin=onshell' at the prompt)
> Type 'help' for the list of all valid option
> Type '0', 'auto', 'done' or just press enter when you are done.[60s to answer]
>
>
> Maybe are you referring to the display in debug mode, which include the hidden line (madspin/...)
> which are important to see (but only in debug mode). [Also for the hidden option of MadSpin]
> In that case, formatting is indeed weird.
> I have (slightly) improve it
> 1) passing the color to green (more consistent with debug coloring in general)
> 2) fixing the change of length due to the presence of the coloring
> This is still not perfect since the length of each column does not take into account those hidden line.
> and therefore they can go to overflow.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Olivier
>
>
>
> On 4 Oct 2018, at 17:16, Rikkert Frederix <<email address hidden> <mailto:<email address hidden>><mailto:<email address hidden> <mailto:<email address hidden>>>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> A small change means that the switches are okay now for the QCD stuff. However, for QED, the formatting looks off. I'm not sure we should be too worried about this, since it works correctly. If there is a simple fix, we might apply it.
>
> Cheers,
> Rikkert
>
> --
> https://code.launchpad.net/~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/3.0.1/+merge/356133
> You are requested to review the proposed merge of lp:~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/3.0.1 into lp:~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/FKS_EW_granny.
>
>
> --
> https://code.launchpad.net/~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/3.0.1/+merge/356133
> You are requested to review the proposed merge of lp:~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/3.0.1 into lp:~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/FKS_EW_granny.
>
>
> --
> https://code.launchpad.net/~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/3.0.1/+merge/356133 <https://code.launchpad.net/~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/3.0.1/+merge/356133>
> You are requested to review the proposed merge of lp:~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/3.0.1 into lp:~maddevelopers/mg5amcnlo/FKS_EW_granny.

« Back to merge proposal