You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We need to remove depreciated functions to add symmetry-related fragments, and add documentation to properly discuss how different symmetries should be added (see #95 (comment)).
Separately, we should also have a discussion about whether we want to continue to deal with symmetries in this way; the current approach may run into issues when deal with space group symmetries and a single approach should be possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
for what it's worth, I'm planning to clean up the symmetry code at some point soon.
I didn't have any major changes in mind, except perhaps moving from chaining fragments (parent fragment->child fragments->grandchild fragments->...), where each inheritance step is characterized by a single symmetry operation only, to a setup where there are only parent and one level of child fragments, but their symmetry operations can be nested (say translation + rotation).
Separately, we should also have a discussion about whether we want to continue to deal with symmetries in this way; the current approach may run into issues when deal with space group symmetries and a single approach should be possible.
Can you elaborate what other approach you have in mind here?
We need to remove depreciated functions to add symmetry-related fragments, and add documentation to properly discuss how different symmetries should be added (see #95 (comment)).
Separately, we should also have a discussion about whether we want to continue to deal with symmetries in this way; the current approach may run into issues when deal with space group symmetries and a single approach should be possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: