This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
2013:groups:tools:dlha [2013/06/20 14:31] balazs.csaba |
2013:groups:tools:dlha [2013/06/20 17:24] (current) balazs.csaba |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
* Elevate the DLH agreement to a DLH Accord, | * Elevate the DLH agreement to a DLH Accord, | ||
* Start implementing DLHA in dark matter calculators. | * Start implementing DLHA in dark matter calculators. | ||
+ | * Testing DLHA between at least two codes is essential before the final report is completed. | ||
==== 1st discussion ==== | ==== 1st discussion ==== | ||
Line 38: | Line 39: | ||
* The table header should look like this: | * The table header should look like this: | ||
* TABLE <name> <column> <row> | * TABLE <name> <column> <row> | ||
- | * The name will probably be inherited from the function | + | * The name will probably be inherited from the function. |
* In some cases, when the table can be given in different parametrizations/coordinates, the name will have to include info about about this. | * In some cases, when the table can be given in different parametrizations/coordinates, the name will have to include info about about this. | ||
* We should consider the I/O of "external" tables, namely table I/O from/to a separate (non-DLHA) file. | * We should consider the I/O of "external" tables, namely table I/O from/to a separate (non-DLHA) file. | ||
Line 48: | Line 49: | ||
* There's a problem with trying to agree upon the I/O of existing functions in existing codes, because this would restrict coding. This problem arises when directly accessing existing methods within existing codes, such as: | * There's a problem with trying to agree upon the I/O of existing functions in existing codes, because this would restrict coding. This problem arises when directly accessing existing methods within existing codes, such as: | ||
* ''FUNCTION <name> type=<type> args=<# of args> | libName=<name of compiled library> | funcName=<name of function in library> | END_FUNCTION'' | * ''FUNCTION <name> type=<type> args=<# of args> | libName=<name of compiled library> | funcName=<name of function in library> | END_FUNCTION'' | ||
- | * Agreement about the I/O of these directly accessed functions could severely tie the hands of the author(s) of the original code, and it is not feasible. | + | * Agreement about the I/O of these directly accessed functions could tie the hands of the author(s) of the original code. |
+ | |||
+ | ==== 4th discussion ==== | ||
+ | * A DLHA reader/writer prototype can be created based on SLHA+. | ||
+ | * FUNCTION I/O should happen via arrays. | ||
+ | * We should consider agreeing about the I/O of existing methods in existing calculators. (For abundance, direct or indirect detection calculations, for example.) Then the authors of the codes could distribute a pre-compiled Linux library from which these methods could be called directly based on DLHA. | ||
+ | * We should specify the number of significant figures (16 was suggested) for numerical values. | ||
==== Things to do ==== | ==== Things to do ==== | ||
* The write-up has to be updated to reflect the changes we decide to make at LH13. | * The write-up has to be updated to reflect the changes we decide to make at LH13. | ||
* ... | * ... |