← Back to team overview

dolfin team mailing list archive

Re: Dirichlet bc functions

 



Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 02:38:36PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:

Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 11:22:26AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 06:29:25PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 05:52:21PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
Do we want to insist that Dirichlet bc functions that do not appear inside a form are constructed with a FunctionSpace? DirichletBC is supplied with a FunctionSpace, so if the bc Function does not have a FunctionSpace, we could attach one automatically.

Garth
_______________________________________________
DOLFIN-dev mailing list
DOLFIN-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
I think this is already handled. Look in the Poisson demo. It uses a
Constant to set the BC and it does not have a FunctionSpace attached
to it. The DirichletBC class now uses its own FunctionSpace rather
than the one that the Function has (if any). There is a check (in
DirichletBC::check()) that checks that the FunctionSpace for the
Function is the same as the one in the DirichletBC.

It works for Constant, but not for Functions. I was getting an error when Function::interpolate is called. Function::interpolate leads to eval being called, in which case there is a test for the FunctionSpace which fails. Constant provides its own eval and therefore doesn't have a problem.

For now, I've added a test in DirichletBC for the FunctionSpace. What we can add is an attach function if there is no FunctionSpace associated.

Garth
In which demo does this show up? Is there a simple way I can comment
something out to reproduce the error so I understand what goes wrong?

Look at /demo/nls/nonlinearpoisson/cpp.

If you change

   DirichletBoundaryCondition g(V, t);

to

   DirichletBoundaryCondition g(t);

it will break down.

Garth
ok I see the problem now.

The problem is a user may choose to either overload a scalar eval
function or a tensor eval function and we need to decide which one
after the callback from ufc::function::evaluate(). If the
FunctionSpace is not known, we can't decide which one to pick.

If we insist that one should be able to pass a Function without a
FunctionSpace to a DirichletBC, then we must remove the scalar eval
function.

Fine with me. I think that it makes things simpler because the eval interface remains the same for all user-defined functions.

Garth

ok. It will also look the same as in Python.


We discussed recently passing an object to eval() which contains some data. It would be useful the object also carried information on the rank and dimension of the function to allow checks and switching between 1D/2D/3D problems.

Garth



------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
DOLFIN-dev mailing list
DOLFIN-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev




Follow ups

References