dolfin team mailing list archive

[Johan Jansson <johanjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 08:50:39AM -0500, Anders Logg wrote:
> Great. It's good that things can be fixed by adding small pieces of
> code on the SWIG side, but maybe later we could look at ways to
> minimize the extra amount of code we need to maintain so everything is
> automatic (by fixing things on the DOLFIN side)?
> 
> /Anders
> 

Yes, that's true. It didn't feel right to reimplement the settings
system to make it work in SWIG though. I think it's better to rewrite
it when we have some ideas for improvement, and not just as a way to
get around limitations of SWIG.

Also, to some extent SWIG is a bit like the wild west, the ambition is
not to produce a formal mapping between C++ and Python (which is
probably not even fully possible), but more just to get things to
work. So I think the threshold for adding hacks, glue, etc. to the
SWIG interface is (and should be) much lower than for doing the same
to DOLFIN. What do you think?

  Johan