Closed mfherbst closed 11 hours ago
I suggest to discuss any further changes to chemical species with @tjjarvinen -- there is a definite need to overhaul this and I understand he has a concrete plan.
Note that I'm changing the Z -> data cache from an array to a Dict. Not sure if that has big performance implications, one could also handle this differently. @cortner probably knows if this may be an issue.
I doubt this matters in practice.
I don't mind about :T
and :X
, I have no strong views. I do suggest though that any atoms of type :X
have no units...
Yes, I have plan and can make PR over weekend. After that we can discuss how to proceed.
Ok sounds good.
What's the status with respect to the overhaul of ChemicalSpecies
?
The inclusion of 0 / :Z
is blocking for me in the move to AtomsBase 0.4. If redesigning ChemicalSpecies
will take some time (fine for me), could we get this minimal modification merged ?
I was busy moving to back Europe the last week. The new version only needs masses added for isotopes and few other small things. I should be able to do it by tomorrow.
Superseded by #130
Adds a few more special cases to the handling of chemical species plus a bit of cleanup.
:X
is fairly common in atomic structure files as a "dummy atom" with atomic number0
. We can either force everyone to drop such atoms before using our stuff or include support here.Here I am proposing to add this special case along with
:T
for tritium.Note that I'm changing the Z -> data cache from an array to a Dict. Not sure if that has big performance implications, one could also handle this differently. @cortner probably knows if this may be an issue.