Skip to content

WIP: Pull request for merging LMU modifications#41

Open
SimonRit wants to merge 7 commits intoRTKConsortium:mainfrom
SimonRit:LMU_HeCT
Open

WIP: Pull request for merging LMU modifications#41
SimonRit wants to merge 7 commits intoRTKConsortium:mainfrom
SimonRit:LMU_HeCT

Conversation

@SimonRit
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@SimonRit SimonRit commented Oct 8, 2025

No description provided.

@acoussat
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

acoussat commented Apr 3, 2026

I have converted pctpairprotonsLomaLinda.cxx to Python here: SimonRit#1. Feel free to comment on it. I still would like to add a test before merging.

I'm not sure what needs to be done with pctpairprotonsLMU_IMPCT.cxx, as far as I understand the conversion does not do much besides applying some fluence level (as in pctpairprotonsLomaLinda.cxx ), filtering protons and alpha particles in a way I don't fully understand (what are 2212 and 1000020040?), and converting centimeters to millimeters. Also, I don't have a test file for this case.

I don't fully remember what was said about those scripts, sorry.

@acoussat
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@SimonRit can I rebase on top of main now to solve the conflicts?

@SimonRit
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@SimonRit can I rebase on top of main now to solve the conflicts?

Sure

@acoussat
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I think the PR is almost ready, the only thing I could still see missing is some documentation. Should I try to add some, should we ask George to write some, or do we consider the new features as niche and just skip the documentation?

@SimonRit
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

I think the PR is almost ready, the only thing I could still see missing is some documentation. Should I try to add some, should we ask George to write some, or do we consider the new features as niche and just skip the documentation?

Thanks. We should document all the functionalities but that can come later. Reviewing the PR (which I can't approve as it's mine!), I wonder if it makes sense to have the two applications pctpaircuts and pctfilterprotons. Both take a list of protons pairs and cut/filter some according to some (different) criteria. What do you think?

@acoussat
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I completely agree and I even thought about merging the two codes into one when implementing it. The problem is that pctpaircuts is, at the moment, only implemented in C++. So I think it would be better to wait that pctpaircuts is reimplemented as an ITK filter (thanks to you!), then we can either move the code of pctfilterprotons into this new filter (in C++), or in a new pctpaircuts application that would internally use this filter (in Python).

@SimonRit
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

The functionalities in pctfilterprotons should be merged in pctpaircuts before merging.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants