dolfin team mailing list archive

["Anders Logg" <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Dear Anders,
> 
> To tell you the truth I didn't understand how this suggestion will
> make things
> easier for the user! 

The purpose was not to make things easier for the user, the purpose was
to get a good design. DOLFIN is very much in development, and our first
priority is to get things right. Once things have converged, we'll start
writing manuals and documentation.

On the other hand, I promise you that the redesign (in part) of the
Function classes will make things easier for the user. The only thing
the user will see is the class Function. Everything else is hidden.

> What is really missing is a good manual which explaines how all these
classes
> interruct and what for what reason they exist!

I agree.

> What would be more helpful for the user would be an interface like this!
> Mesh2D Th(...); //some arguments needed for the creation of the mesh

This can be fixed (using Triangle or TetGen for the generation of the
mesh). If you're familiar with any any of these, feel free to
contribute. I can give you suggestions.

> FemSpace Vh(Th, P1), Uh(Th, P1); //P1 langrangian elements
> 
> Problem WeakFormulation( grad(Vh)*grad(Uh) - f*Vh ); //for a Poisson
problem
> or even
> Problem WeakFormulation( Vh.dx*Uh.dx+Vh.dy*Uh.dy - f*Vh ); //

This will happen in the future. In fact, this part will be moved outside
of DOLFIN (but still look as if it were part of DOLFIN). The evaluation
of variational forms will be moved to other subprojects within the
FEniCS project.

> This would be great because it is the easiest way for a user to describe 
> a PDE. I am thinking of finding a way to implement this thing in my code! 
> Do you have any ideas?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> Drosos.
> 
> 
> Then someother way to describe boundary conditions!

Sure, you will have all that and more. But understand that DOLFIN (and
FEniCS) is a research project which means that our first priority is to
get things right.

Best wishes
/Anders