[PWGHF] Adding D0/Lc analysis task

[laszlogyulai]

Adding a new analysis task for calculating the D0/Lambda_c yield ratio as a function of flattenicity

[github-actions]

O2 linter results: ❌ 0 errors, ⚠️ 7 warnings, 🔕 0 disabled

[laszlogyulai]

Dear codeowners,

Is it possible to overcome the "magic number" errors in the O2 linter / O2 linter (pull_request_target) check? In my opinion it would unnecessarily complicate the existing code. You can see an example of such a solution in the PWGLF/Tasks/GlobalEventProperties/flattenicityPikp.cxx file (lines 1814-1908)

[vkucera]

Dear codeowners,

Is it possible to overcome the "magic number" errors in the O2 linter / O2 linter (pull_request_target) check? In my opinion it would unnecessarily complicate the existing code. You can see an example of such a solution in the PWGLF/Tasks/GlobalEventProperties/flattenicityPikp.cxx file (lines 1814-1908)

The way to "overcome" it is to write it in a better way. From what I can see, you map some number to other numbers. So how about using a map or an array, for example?

[laszlogyulai]

Dear codeowners,
Is it possible to overcome the "magic number" errors in the O2 linter / O2 linter (pull_request_target) check? In my opinion it would unnecessarily complicate the existing code. You can see an example of such a solution in the PWGLF/Tasks/GlobalEventProperties/flattenicityPikp.cxx file (lines 1814-1908)

The way to "overcome" it is to write it in a better way. From what I can see, you map some number to other numbers. So how about using a map or an array, for example?

Dear Vit,

Thank you for the nice and easy solution to the issue. Everything should be fine now.

[vkucera]

Dear codeowners,
Is it possible to overcome the "magic number" errors in the O2 linter / O2 linter (pull_request_target) check? In my opinion it would unnecessarily complicate the existing code. You can see an example of such a solution in the PWGLF/Tasks/GlobalEventProperties/flattenicityPikp.cxx file (lines 1814-1908)

The way to "overcome" it is to write it in a better way. From what I can see, you map some number to other numbers. So how about using a map or an array, for example?

Dear Vit,

Thank you for the nice and easy solution to the issue. Everything should be fine now.

Thanks @laszlogyulai for the implementation. It looks indeed much better now.

[vkucera]

Suggested change

	std::array<float, nCellsFV0> rhoLatticeFV0{0};
	std::array<float, nCellsFV0> fv0AmplitudeWoCalib{0};
	std::array<float, nCellsFV0> rhoLatticeFV0{};
	std::array<float, nCellsFV0> fv0AmplitudeWoCalib{};

[vkucera]

Why is this not a std::array?

[vkucera]

Since you are adding a new file, please fix also the warnings.