dolfin team mailing list archive

[Kent Andre <kent-and@xxxxxxxxx>]

On on., 2009-08-19 at 12:03 +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> 
> Kent Andre wrote:
> >> Not sure what we have to do actually. I suppose I want get any clue from the 
> >>
> >>   demo/function/restriction
> >>
> >> demo? 
> >>
> >> I see that Kent has modified the dolfin.FunctionSpace to reflect the present 
> >> (broken) implementation of restriction, anything in that line? Should such an 
> >> implementation has been done in FunctionSpaceBase instead of FunctionSpace? 
> >> Kent?
> >>
> >> Johan
> >>
> > 
> > This restriction is different in the sense that the restriction is made
> > by the standard element on a sub mesh. 
> > 
> > The restriction in focus now is on the complete mesh but for only
> > a part of the element. 
> > 
> > Combined, these two features will be very powerful.  I guess the 
> > sub-mesh restriction stuff is broken due to the parallel mesh. 
> > 
> 
> Yes, we had to clean-up the DofMap in particular to make progress with 
> parallel assembly which means that sub-mesh restriction is broken at the 
> moment.
> 
> Garth
> 

OK, I guess we should also discuss whether sub-mesh type restrictions
should be done in this way (by a mesh and a mesh-function) or if a
sub-mesh should be implemented. 


Kent