← Back to team overview

dolfin team mailing list archive

Re: New Function implementation

 

I guess it's the same bug as Nuno David Lopes reported earlier.
It works fine for me, but I just pushed an attempt to fix this. See if
it helps.

-- 
Anders


On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 03:34:43PM -0400, Shawn Walker wrote:
> I will definitely look at it.  I think it is a good idea.
>
> However, I recently tried to compile, and I got an error with file used  
> for dG.  I can reproduce it if you want.
>
> - Shawn
>
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Anders Logg wrote:
>
>> I've finished up the new implementation of the Function class.
>> It's untested, but I'm pretty sure it works... :-) I'm very happy with
>> the way it turned out.
>>
>> Anyway, it would be good if anyone interested would review the design
>> and implementation (in detail, including function names etc).
>>
>> The Function class is central so it would be good if we could agree on
>> a design and keep it stable for some time (like we've managed with the
>> linear algebra interfaces).
>>
>> The main changes compared to the old/current design are as follows:
>>
>> 1. Introduction of a FunctionSpace class. A FunctionSpace is defined
>> by a Mesh, a FiniteElement and a DofMap.
>>
>> 2. Removal of the class hierarchy. Only one class Function remains.
>> This acts dynamically either as a user-defined function (if the vector
>> of coefficients is null) or as the old DiscreteFunction.
>>
>> 3. The proliferation of constructors has been removed. There is
>> essentially only one constructor, namely
>>
>>  v = Function(V)
>>
>> An additional class named Constant should be added to handle constant
>> functions, overloading eval() and providing a bunch of constructors
>> (scalar, vector, tensor).
>>
>> When we've settled on the design/implementation of Function and
>> FunctionSpace, we need to do a round of editing of the DofMap class.
>>
>>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Follow ups

References