template rate indices and corresponding changes for NSE_NET

[zhichen3]

Based on Pr#1231.

Added rate indices for aprox networks and iso7 to be compatible updated pynucastro c++ network template.
Delete unnecessary files that declare and initialize rate indices since now we do it directly via pynucastro, or hard coded it for aprox networks.

[zhichen3]

Flat profile:

Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
  %   cumulative   self              self     total           
 time   seconds   seconds    calls   s/call   s/call  name    
 19.99     27.81    27.81 1738717728     0.00     0.00  get_partition_function(int, tf_t const&, double&, double&)
 14.99     48.67    20.86 36104765     0.00     0.00  void fcn<burn_t>(amrex::Array1D<double, 1, 2>&, amrex::Array1D<double, 1, 2>&, burn_t const&, int&) [clone .constprop.0]
  9.01     61.21    12.54 654530895     0.00     0.00  std::_Function_handler<amrex::GpuTuple<amrex::ValLocPair<double, amrex::IntVect> > (), amrex::ReduceData<amrex::ValLocPair<double, amrex::IntVect> >::ReduceData<amrex::ReduceOpMin>(amrex::ReduceOps<amrex::ReduceOpMin>&)::{lambda()#1}>::_M_manager(std::_Any_data&, std::_Any_data const&, std::_Manager_operation)
  8.58     73.15    11.94      120     0.10     1.16  Castro::react_state(amrex::MultiFab&, amrex::MultiFab&, double, double, int)
  6.44     82.11     8.96 103117525     0.00     0.00  void apply_electrons<burn_t>(burn_t&)
  5.24     89.40     7.29 11060873     0.00     0.00  in_nse(burn_t&, bool)
  4.65     95.87     6.47 11283222     0.00     0.00  Castro::okToContinue()
  4.36    101.93     6.06 10973521     0.00     0.00  void nse_hybrid_solver<burn_t>(burn_t&, double)
  3.77    107.17     5.24 26202960     0.00     0.00  void actual_eos<eos_input_t, burn_t>(eos_input_t, burn_t&)
  2.99    111.33     4.16 10984671     0.00     0.00  void hybrj<2, burn_t>(hybrj_t<2>&, burn_t const&)
  2.54    114.87     3.54 15221646     0.00     0.00  void evaluate_rates<0, rate_t>(burn_t const&, rate_t&)
  2.44    118.27     3.40 81521661     0.00     0.00  is_fastest_rate(amrex::Array1D<int, 1, 2>&, double&, int, amrex::Array1D<double, 1, 22> const&, burn_t const&, amrex::Array1D<double, 1, 93> const&, amrex::Array1D<int, 1, 22> const&, double const&)
  2.44    121.66     3.39 15680708     0.00     0.00  sneut5(double, double, double, double, double&, double&, double&, double&, double&)
  1.93    124.34     2.69 15221646     0.00     0.00  void fill_reaclib_rates<0, rate_t>(tf_t const&, rate_t&)
  0.78    125.42     1.08 15680708     0.00     0.00  rhs_nuc(burn_t const&, amrex::Array1D<double, 1, 23>&, amrex::Array1D<double, 1, 22> const&, amrex::Array1D<double, 1, 93> const&)
  0.75    126.47     1.05 14230922     0.00     0.00  void chabrier1998<1>(plasma_state_t const&, scrn::screen_factors_t const&, double&, double&)
  0.64    127.36     0.89 15221646     0.00     0.00  void rate_ne20_to_he4_o16_derived<0>(tf_t const&, double&, double&)
  0.61    128.21     0.85 15221646     0.00     0.00  void rate_cr48_to_p_v47_derived_removed<0>(tf_t const&, double&, double&)
  0.59    129.02     0.82 15221646     0.00     0.00  void rate_mg24_to_he4_ne20_derived<0>(tf_t const&, double&, double&)
  0.52    129.75     0.73 15221646     0.00     0.00  void rate_he4_si28_to_p_p31_derived<0>(tf_t const&, double&, double&)
  0.51    130.46     0.71 15221646     0.00     0.00  void rate_s32_to_p_p31_derived<0>(tf_t const&, double&, double&)
  0.50    131.16     0.70 15221646     0.00     0.00  void rate_ca40_to_p_k39_derived_removed<0>(tf_t const&, double&, double&)
  0.49    131.84     0.69 15221646     0.00     0.00  void rate_he4_mg24_to_p_al27_derived<0>(tf_t const&, double&, double&)

It seems like a lot of time is taken when constructing fcn and getting the partition function.

I still want to optimize the is_fastest_rate function, since it looks inefficient.

[zingale]

can you resolve these conflicts?

[zingale]

couldn't these actually be constexpr int p_index = ...?
the values don't change, right?

[zhichen3]

Indeed. I fixed that, also did a corresponding change in pynucastro pr.

[yut23]

Should this update ignition_simple too?

[zhichen3]

Should this update ignition_simple too?

Yes, I missed that. Now it is updated.