Mapping experiment

[MarcusZuber]

Experiments for mapping of a sample.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 88.36% // Head: 88.25% // Decreases project coverage by -0.12% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (68d315a) compared to base (4f2027c).
Patch coverage: 84.42% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #516      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.36%   88.25%   -0.12%     
==========================================
  Files         120      122       +2     
  Lines        8306     8550     +244     
==========================================
+ Hits         7340     7546     +206     
- Misses        966     1004      +38     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
concert/experiments/mapping.py	78.77% <78.77%> (ø)
concert/tests/integration/test_mapping.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[tfarago]

I see how this is useful, but a similar remark to the one about exper. simplification: wouldn't it make sense to rather implement it via our own scanning routines? Theyare quite flexible and the treajectories could be just passed to a scan.

[MarcusZuber]

I thought about using the scans, but for what I'm planing in particular (after this more or less abstract implementation here) more interaction between the experiment and the scan is required.

[tfarago]

OK, do your thing, then I'll review, but again keep in mind #481 please, which in this context means: do not write more code then necessary for the near future please.