dolfin team mailing list archive

["Martin Sandve Alnæs" <martinal@xxxxxxxxx>]

2008/4/10, Ola Skavhaug <skavhaug@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Anders Logg skrev den 10/04-2008 følgende:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 06:19:59PM +0200, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
>  > > I've been debugging some boundary condition trouble with the
>  > > syfi/pydolfin combination and vector elements, and narrowed it down to
>  > > the interpolate function which is used prior to plotting.
>  > >
>  > > The bug is in the assumed numbering of the vertex_values array as
>  > > returned by ufc::finite_element::interpolate_vertex_values:
>  > >
>  > > void DiscreteFunction::interpolate(real* values) const
>  > > {
>  > > ...
>  > >
>  > >     // Copy values to array of vertex values
>  > >     for (VertexIterator vertex(*cell); !vertex.end(); ++vertex)
>  > >       for (uint i = 0; i < scratch->size; ++i)
>  > >         values[i*mesh.numVertices() + vertex->index()] =
>  > > vertex_values[i*num_cell_vertices + vertex.pos()];
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > By the UFC definition this should've been:
>  > >
>  > > vertex_values[vertex.pos()*scratch->size + i];
>  > >
>  > > i.e. the vector components are collected together in memory for each
>  > > vertex. This bug must be mirrored in FFC, and should be fixed both
>  > > places at once.
>  > >
>  > > I'll let someone with write access to FFC and DOLFIN fix it.
>  >
>  > Then should we also change the order Viper expects to receive the
>  > values?
>
>
> Sure. You update stuff, I'll make it work with Viper later.
>
>
>  Ola

What does VTK expect?

--
Martin