improve documentation of the Widom insertion method

[jonaslandsgesell]

This PR adds documentation for the Widom insertion method.

In addition it adds the feature to change reaction constants and delete reactions. This is functionality which Oleg (@helvrud) suggested and which gives some more flexibility to the user.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3254 into python will decrease coverage by <1%.
The diff coverage is 75%.

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           python   #3254   +/-   ##
======================================
- Coverage      86%     86%   -1%     
======================================
  Files         538     538           
  Lines       25346   25350    +4     
======================================
- Hits        21831   21830    -1     
- Misses       3515    3520    +5

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/core/reaction_ensemble.hpp	78% <100%> (ø)	⬆️
src/core/reaction_ensemble.cpp	86% <50%> (-1%)	⬇️
src/core/particle_data.cpp	96% <0%> (-1%)	⬇️
src/core/electrostatics_magnetostatics/p3m.cpp	85% <0%> (-1%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 0c813ca...67a9ef5. Read the comment docs.

[RudolfWeeber]

@kosovan, would you be willing to review this?

[kosovan]

@kosovan, would you be willing to review this?

@RudolfWeeber I should be able to do it on Tuesday or Wednesday. I am not sure if that is not too late but I have some teaching duties that cannot be postponed.

[jonaslandsgesell]

@helvrud I implemented the ability to change the reaction constant or delete reactions you already added:

deletion of a given reaction:

RE.delete_reaction(1)

change of the reaction constant (back and forward reaction simultaneously):

reaction_id=0
RE.change_reaction_constant(reaction_id, new_reaction_constant)

[RudolfWeeber]

@jonaslandsgesell this pr adds functionallity in addition to docs. Please edit the description to explain this PRś intention

[RudolfWeeber]

bors r+

[bors]

👎 Rejected by code reviews

[jonaslandsgesell]

@kosovan could you mark your comments as resolved? Otherwise the merge cannot proceed and people do not find documentation about the method. If there are remaining problems please open a new issue for them.

[KaiSzuttor]

@jonaslandsgesell that's an issue of bors actually

[KaiSzuttor]

bors r+

[bors]

👎 Rejected by code reviews

[jngrad]

@KaiSzuttor it's actually a feature, bors won't merge if anyone requested a change, until that person approves the PR. You can dismiss kosovan's review if you want to proceed with bors.

[jngrad]

Should this PR be milestoned as 4.2 or 4.1.2?

[KaiSzuttor]

@jngrad personally I think only github should decide whether the PR is ready to merge. Also, it seems that I'm not able to dismiss the review of @kosovan. So we can only manually merge.

[KaiSzuttor]

... and the API says it's ready to merge

[RudolfWeeber]

Should this PR be milestoned as 4.2 or 4.1.2?

Ideally, this should have been two PRs. Since the potential of side effects is small in this case, I’d be OK with 4.1.2

[kosovan]

Hey guys,

I apologize for the late response. I was not aware that this was waiting for me to mark my requests as resolved. Sorry if I delayed the merge unnecessarily.

[KaiSzuttor]

@kosovan as I said, that's not your fault. It's a bug of the mergebot.