tschoonj
commented
1 year ago Hi Benjamin,
I have indeed no plans to update XMI-MSIM, and if I have a bit of time, I would rather focus it on xraylib, which has a lot more users and is a lot simpler 😄
I have made the XMI-MSIM release cycle rather painful by focusing on creating the Windows installer, macOS app bundle and Linux RPM/DEB packages, which takes a lot of testing to get right.
To improve this, I believe that one should:
- remove the Windows registry and macOS app specific code
- remove the special Windows installer and macOS app bundle builds
- port the buildsystem to meson/ninja, and dump the autotools build
- test conda builds for the three major platforms
- add XMI-MSIM to conda-forge
Quite a bit of work but most of it should be fun.
Any interest in getting your hands dirty? 😉
bbazi
Hi Tom,
I was wondering if the collimator could have some extra parameters to have some more flexibility. It would be nice if the collimator would have separate input and output diameters, instead of just the input. In this way we can better simulate collimation where we use multiple pinholes (with different sizes).
Also, it would be very nice to have the fluorescence interact with the collimator material itself, for example in our high-energy experiments we see that the X-rays coming from the sample interact with the collimator inducing extra scatter and fluorescence. So ideally we would be able to treat the collimator like a sample which has its own density, thickness and list of elements. Not sure if it was even planned to update XMI-MSIM any further, these are just some thoughts :-)
Cheers, Benjamin