Michael Howard

OK, thank you! I will make sure to apply those changes once the user API gets fully updated. I started on the data structures and had to take a break,...

@bdice thanks! I think I had a similar issue myself when I wrote this plugin code: https://github.com/mphoward/azplugins/blob/master/azplugins/RDFAnalyzer.cc It was a while ago, but I think there was some problem with...

I suspect the difference between the two programs is here: https://github.com/glotzerlab/freud/blob/b483a83fb3e6fc81c667a5c3b435a777e829fc0c/cpp/density/RDF.cc#L125 Since there are only `N-1` pairs per particle (and not `N`) when `ref_points` and `points` are the same, `ndens`...

Now that I've looked at the code and think I understand the discrepancy, I'm happy enough to multiply my results by `N/(N-1)` if necessary while y'all decide on what you...

I'm not quite sure what I would call it... I guess it should probably be a bool that toggles the modes, something like your `exclude_ii`, but that name doesn't make...

I don't think there's a need to set or apply a prefactor if the code is not able to do the exclusion between arbitrary sets of particles anyway. Right now,...

I think this is very reasonable. One thing that could perhaps be done as a convenience (and not sure if this is any easier for the user) is to optionally...

> The most reasonable mixed precision model for HOOMD is to maintain particle coordinates in double, compute forces in single, and accumulate forces in double. HOOMD is too general for...

I think we should decide how we want to approach this problem in general, as it might affect whether it makes sense to keep supporting single-precision builds. If we only...

Excellent, I support this plan. MPCD already works in mixed precision as well, although it is in a different sense of some steps require double. I will think about whether...