dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:10:32PM +0200, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
> 2008/6/16 Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 09:46:23PM +0200, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
> >> 2008/6/16 Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 07:06:20PM +0200, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
> >> >> I think DofMapSet should be independent of the form it was initialized with.
> >> >> I believe the sharing of a single set of dofmaps among different forms is one
> >> >> of the key tasks of this class, and that the vector with form argument dofmaps
> >> >> should rather be obtained on demand:
> >> >
> >> > Agree.
> >> >
> >> >>   // Get vector of dofmaps (possibly not unique) for each argument of form
> >> >>   dofmapvector = dofmapset.getDofMaps(form);
> >> >
> >> > What does this function do?
> >>
> >> Gets a vector<DofMap*> with length equal to form.rank() +
> >> form.num_coefficients(),
> >> where each DofMap* is the same if the signature is the same.
> >> In other words, constructs and returns what is currently a member:
> >>
> >>     // Array of dof maps for current form
> >>     std::vector<DofMap*> dof_map_set;
> >>
> >> but on the fly for a given form such that DofMapSet isn't
> >> associated with any particular form.
> >
> > ok, now I understand what you mean. But I would suggest
> >
> >  DofMap& dof_map = dofmapset.extractDofMap(form, i);
> 
> Agree, that was the second function I suggested.

ok.

> > Or are we going to pass around Arrays of DofMaps?
> 
> It was just a convenience function to replace the existing
> functionality, but this functionality should probably rather
> be in UFC or something.

DofMapSet? Perhaps, but that would mean putting *functionality* into
UFC which we haven't done so far (except the Python boilerplate).

-- 
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature