The reason I wrote is the following:
If I change the model on the fly, say by using void CPPProcess::initProc(string param_card_name) and providing a new parameter file with different couplings set, I can arrive at a point, where the new calculations will be spoiled by the previous set of couplings, because of this memory effect.
In other words,
CPPProcess.initProc( "couplings1.dat" );
CPPProcess.sigmaKin();
.....
CPPProcess.initProc( "couplingsN.dat" );
CPPProcess.sigmaKin();
sequence may go wrong for some coupling combinations. In fact, this is exactly what I observe that some models are execution-order dependent.
Hi Olivier,
The reason I wrote is the following: :initProc( string param_card_name) and providing a new parameter file with different couplings set, I can arrive at a point, where the new calculations will be spoiled by the previous set of couplings, because of this memory effect.
If I change the model on the fly, say by using void CPPProcess:
In other words, initProc( "couplings1.dat" ); sigmaKin( ); initProc( "couplingsN.dat" ); sigmaKin( );
CPPProcess.
CPPProcess.
.....
CPPProcess.
CPPProcess.
sequence may go wrong for some coupling combinations. In fact, this is exactly what I observe that some models are execution-order dependent.
Best,
Aurelijus