Other method to enrich mix material library #25
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This method uses Paul's suggestion. The potential downside is that you now rely on the initial and output scripts. Depending on how we want the overall workflow to be, I think will influence which works better.
|
I am not sure this is the right approach. Why not require people to make an enriched "pure material" and then provide that the the standard method for mixing materials. This helps avoid duplication of code. |
|
If you're looking at varying the enrichment like when Edgar and I did the sensitive analysis it's a lot easier this way. I was also thinking that if any of the fission-fusion projects wanted to use this database it'd be useful for making their enriched materials. |
|
I think there's a way to make it nearly as easy without this... |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This method uses Paul's suggestion. The potential downside is that you now rely on the initial and output scripts. Depending on how we want the overall workflow to be, I think will influence which works better.