Stand alone muon reconstruction cleaning for 72x

First step into the track to cure the "close-by muons" inefficiency.
For details see:
https://indico.cern.ch/event/331640/contribution/4/material/slides/0.pdf
Originally based on: HuguesBrun/cleanningBySegIn720
Target is 720pre3
:-) I think you do not want to know when that code was written. The PR did not foresee any cleaning of the code,thought it is related to track cleaning ;-) . Cleaning of the code might be in another PR, right now let's live it in peace...

----- Reply message -----
From: "StoyanStoynev" <notifications@github.com>
To: "cms-sw/cmssw" <cmssw@noreply.github.com>
Cc: "bellan" <riccardo.bellan@cern.ch>
Subject: [cmssw] Stand alone muon reconstruction cleaning for 72x (#4801)
Date: Tue, Aug 5, 2014 17:34

In RecoMuon/TrackingTools/src/MuonTrajectoryCleaner.cc:
> -  TransientTrackingRecHit::ConstRecHitContainer trhC1;
> -  if((*m1).recHit()->dimension()==4) trhC1 = MuonTransientTrackingRecHitBreaker::breakInSubRecHits((*m1).recHit(), 2);
> -  else trhC1.push_back((*m1).recHit());
> - for( TransientTrackingRecHit::ConstRecHitContainer::const_iterator trh1=trhC1.begin(); trh1!=trhC1.end(); ++trh1, ++nTot1DHits_i) {
> -   nTot1DHits_j = 0;
> -   for( m2 = meas2.begin(); m2 != meas2.end(); m2++ ) {
> -     TransientTrackingRecHit::ConstRecHitContainer trhC2;
> -     if((*m2).recHit()->dimension()==4) trhC2 = MuonTransientTrackingRecHitBreaker::breakInSubRecHits((*m2).recHit(), 2);
> -     else trhC2.push_back((*m2).recHit());
> -     for( TransientTrackingRecHit::ConstRecHitContainer::const_iterator trh2=trhC2.begin(); trh2!=trhC2.end(); ++trh2, ++nTot1DHits_j) {
> -       if( ( (*trh1)->globalPosition() - (*trh2)->globalPosition()).mag() < 10e-5 ) match++;
> -       //   if ( ( (*m1).recHit()->globalPosition() - (*m2).recHit()->globalPosition()).mag()< 10e-5 ) match++;
> -     } // end for( trh2 ... )
> -   } // end for( m2 ... )
> -        } // end for( trh1 ... )
> + for( m2 = meas2.begin(); m2 != meas2.end(); m2++ ) {

General comment: use ++X instead of X++ (not only here).  

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.