FrameGeometry shouldn't include certain routines
Jammy2211 opened this issue · comments
James Nightingale commented
You've combined FrameGeommety from cti_image with CIFrame from ci_frame. This is fine for the most part, however there are routines which are specific to charge injection imaging (e.g. parallel_trail_from_y) which are not applicable to other imaging which may need to be a cti_image and thus have a FrameGeometry (e.g. science imaging data).
I would suggest we split the classes again and have CIFrameGeometry inherit from FrameGeometry.
Richard Hayes commented
It’s an ongoing refactor. The motivation was elimination of function duplication using the notion of a readout corner and exploiting symmetries between functions. It may be that a common parent class is more appropriate?
… On 16 Jan 2019, at 11:55, James Nightingale ***@***.***> wrote:
You've combined FrameGeommety from cti_image with CIFrame from ci_frame. This is fine for the most part, however there are routines which are specific to charge injection imaging (e.g. parallel_trail_from_y) which are not applicable to other imaging which may need to be a cti_image and thus have a FrameGeometry (e.g. science imaging data).
I would suggest we split the classes again and have CIFrameGeometry inherit from FrameGeometry.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGETMvK_Jue7qj7WE2b2e1czWWakAREMks5vDxMrgaJpZM4aC55L>.
James Nightingale commented
I'll think on it, still getting to grips with the refactor