Add scalar template parameter in magnetic field

[beomki-yeo]

For #246

[beomki-yeo]

This might be what @krasznaa you mentioned during the chat?
plugin-specific type should also be templated if I am correct

[krasznaa]

Yes. In this class's case I would imagine making it templated on the vector3 and point3 types. Like:

template <typename vector3_t, typename point3_t, typename context_t = dindex>
class constant_magnetic_field {

Since the scalar type is only used for defining these two types in this class, we can even forego declaring those types as templates. So, we would specify a concrete type like:

using b_field_t = constant_magnetic_field<algebra::eigen::vector3<float>, algebra::eigen::point3<float> >;

I didn't try any of this out, but I think something like that could work.

[krasznaa]

This looks good! Let's not try to bite off more than we can chew. We can come back to generalising the templates even further in future PRs.

[krasznaa]

Yes. In this class's case I would imagine making it templated on the vector3 and point3 types. Like:

template <typename vector3_t, typename point3_t, typename context_t = dindex>
class constant_magnetic_field {

Since the scalar type is only used for defining these two types in this class, we can even forego declaring those types as templates. So, we would specify a concrete type like:

using b_field_t = constant_magnetic_field<algebra::eigen::vector3<float>, algebra::eigen::point3<float> >;

I didn't try any of this out, but I think something like that could work.

[krasznaa]

You'll need to resolve the conflict before it could be merged though. 😉

[niermann999]

Is this resolved with #291?

[beomki-yeo]

Um no. I think magnetic field should still take scalar_type rather than transform_type.

[stephenswat]

I think this can be closed now that #311 is merged, right?

[beomki-yeo]

yes