|Message: invalid track ID in PostTracking||Not Logged In (login)|
Click on the Forum title, e.g. on the "Forums by Category" page, to read a sequence of postings to the Forum and its threads all in one page. If you are only interested in one thread or the thread following a specific posting, click the thread or the posting, which takes you to a smaller page, which contains only the part you are interested in and may be easier to navigate.
Messages are "chained" if there are only replies at the first level, i.e. 1/1.html, 1/1/1.html etc. In case of "chained" messages the message number is replaced by the icon and there is no indentation.
Inline: Display the subject line only or also the text of the posting(s); for the choice "All" the "Outline" choices are switched off.
|1||0||1||no text / full text of posting|
|2||1||All||text for level 1 only / text for All postings|
Outline: Choose the depth of the posting thread, successive toggle controls provide increasing detail.
|1||2||1||2 levels / 1 level (original posting)|
|2||3||2||3 levels / 2 levels|
|3||3||All||3 levels / all levels (all postings)|
Hi. I have a complaint about how tracks are received in the user's post tracking function. I am seeing that the track passed in to PostTracking always has a track id of -1. I suppose this is to indicate that it is invalid. But there is already a flag settable via G4Track::IsGoodForTracking() to check if it is a valid track. (I think this function is only used in one place throughout the G4 code, though!) Receiving an invalidated track in the user block causes problems if the user application has setup any data structures relying on track id for that event, which certainly seems legitimate. Otherwise, instead of track ID, I suppose one could use the track object pointer itself, which would probably not change, unless the track is copied someplace. So I am wondering if there is a legitimate design decision for setting the track ID to -1 before PostTracking, given that this information is quite useful there? It seems to me that invalidating an object's data before it is destroyed goes against good programming practice. By the way, I am only using track ID to lookup the associated trajectory, which has all the "user specific" information for my application. --Jeremy
|Inline Depth:||Outline Depth:||Add message:|