-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
Updates #1
base: add-gw-radiation
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Updates #1
Conversation
Make parameter to ChooseTimesstep() const
Actually, the code and comment here:
don't match. The comment says EDIT: In view of the need to get this done this weekend I'm ok to let this go and fix it later. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @jeffriley ,
I am happy with your change, modulo a request to update the declaration of ChooseTimestep() in BaseBinaryStar.h. (It will happily compile without an update because the signature stayed the same, with a const double argument, but it'll be confusing for future developers otherwise.)
I agree with your unhappiness about the kludge for "over-tightened" binaries -- see my comments on the original PR -- but that can be fixed later (the right fix is, IMHO, to stop using a negative semi-major axis as a proxy for an unbound binary).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, @jeffriley !
I'm not sure if Adam is still online, so I'll merge this in (Adam can always check later, but I don't see anything objectionable here); please go ahead and approve Adam's original PR afterwards if you are OK with it [note my three caveats there on things to work on in the future, one of which matches yours].
Ahh, never mind, can't roll it in -- claims I don't have write access... Which is strange, because I was able to edit Adam's PR directly on his branch via github? |
Odd - I can't pull it in either. I was also able to edit Adam's branch... |
OK, I can just apply the same edits by hand to Adam's branch. ;-) |
I have made significant changes to
BaseBinaryStar::Evolve()
. In its current form, even when the option--emit-gravitational-radiation
is not selected, COMPAS v03.01.00 creates a different detailed output file file from COMPAS v03.00.05 for the command:The value of
dt
is calculated differently in v03.01.00 even when--emit-gravitational-radiation
is not selected. My changes reinstate the code so that v03.01.00 and v03.00.05 calculatedt
in the same way (and produce identical detailed output files) when--emit-gravitational-radiation
is not selected.I believe my changes preserve the
dt
calculation for GW emission, but you should check this. I have checked for the command shown above, and the detailed output files when--emit-gravitational-radiation
is selected are identical - EXCEPT that I have changed the code to reduce the duration of the first timestep (see comments in code). If you remove the reduction of the first timestep, the detailed output files are identical my updates vs your original code (if you choose to remove the reduction of the duration of the first timestep, you should only remove it for the GW case - it should be retained for the non-GW case).As part of those changes I also changed
BaseBinaryStar::ChooseTimestep()
.I do not like this line in the code:
Can we not avoid this kludge? Perhaps if we change the definition of
HasStarsTouching()
fromto
I don't think that will have adverse effects in other places that
HasStarsTouching()
is used - thoughts?