| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
>>> Apart from fixing various configure/compilation issues for 0.6.3, the >>> time has come to replace the mesh library. There are two main >>> options: >>> >>> 1. The first option is to just port everything right away to the new >>> mesh library. This should be fairly straightforward, since the API is >>> mostly the same and I have completed most of the functionality we use >>> (but we'll probably discover something missing along the way). One big >>> difference from before is that we can remove the templating in FEM and >>> just iterate over facets. >>> >>> 2. One big thing is missing and that is adaptive mesh refinement. I >>> have not ported the algorithms in MeshRefinement to the new mesh (but >>> uniform refinement is implemented). The second option is to wait until >>> we have adaptive mesh refinement in place. >>> >>> The choice would depend on how many are actually using adaptive mesh >>> refinement and how much work we want to spend on porting the mesh >>> refinement algorithms. The current implementation makes special use of >>> the old mesh data structures (including the class PArray which is up >>> for removal when the new mesh library has replaced the old). >>> >>> Any thoughts? Who is using adaptive mesh refinement? >> >> We are using local mesh refinement, and I believe this is a desireable >> feature for many users. Maybe I'm wrong? > > I agree it is desirable and of course we need it, but the question is who > is ready to port the existing (or an alternative) adaptive mesh refinement > algorithms to the new mesh library? > >> I do not think we should brake the local mesh refinement algorithms. At >> least there should then be the option of using the old mesh library >> until >> the local mesh refinement is in place in the new mesh format. > > There is always the option of using an old version. > >> If no one else is interested in this feature I will implement these >> algorithms. It would fit well with our activity in other mesh >> modification >> algorithms. > > Sounds very good. > >> But I still think the option of using the old mesh should be there, >> instead of breaking the local mesh refinement capability. > > With a reasonable level of commitment, we should be able to port the > adaptive refinement pretty quickly. Do we want to implement the same > algorithm as before or are there other options? It could for example be > desirable to implement something that does not need to operate on the > entire hierarchy. We'll take a look at this the coming week. Feel free to come with suggestions regarding good available algorithms, or desireably features in a new algorithm. /Johan > > /Anders > > > _______________________________________________ > DOLFIN-dev mailing list > DOLFIN-dev@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev >
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
