dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 10:12:21AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> 
> 
> Anders Logg wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 10:36:52AM +0100, Johan Hake wrote:
> >> On Sunday 15 February 2009 21:23:44 DOLFIN wrote:
> >>> One or more new changesets pushed to the primary dolfin repository.
> >>> A short summary of the last three changesets is included below.
> >>>
> >>> changeset:   5701:d3661203791d9c7707695c59adbbd3a2e20a220c
> >>> tag:         tip
> >>> user:        Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>> date:        Sun Feb 15 21:23:36 2009 +0100
> >>> files:       dolfin/function/Function.cpp
> >>> description:
> >>> Move code from Function copy constructor to assignment operator and
> >>> call assignment operator from copy constructor
> >> I liked Garth solution better. 
> >>
> >>  1) A copy constructor that, just copies the Function if it has
> >>     a FunctionSpace.
> >>  2) The assignment operator works only for discrete Functions. 
> >>
> >> We could add an interpolate() (or something) function that
> >>
> >>   v.interpolate(*_vector, *_function_space);
> > 
> > We already have exactly such a function.
> > 
> >> Then the user can explicitly create a discrete function of its user-defined 
> >> Function. Now the user gets this as an implicitly result of a function copy, 
> >> which make litle sense to me. 
> >>
> >> But that's just me :)
> > 
> > I like it. Other opinions?
> >
> 
> It is neat, but I would prefer any interpolation to be more explicit so 
> that it's clear what's going on. A copy should be a straight copy.
> 
> Garth

ok. I've changed it back. See if it looks ok.

-- 
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature