dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 03:40:34PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>
>
> Anders Logg wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 10:39:33PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >> I'm not too keen that Mesh::refine() calls AdaptiveObjects::refine(). It
> >> breaks the nice separation of the Mesh library from other parts of
> >> DOLFIN. Can we do it differently? Should the user call something like
> >>
> >>   AdaptiveObjects.refine(mesh, markers)l
> >>
> >> to refine the mesh?
> >>
> >> Garth
> >
> > Ideally, the mesh library should not depend on other parts of DOLFIN.
> > But I couldn't find any other way to handle this. The problem is that
> >
> >
> >   mesh.refine()
> >
> > would otherwise break all other objects depending on it, including all
> > function spaces and all functions.
>
> What about having free functions
>
>   refine(mesh);
>   refine(mesh, cell_marks);
>
> ?

Yes, that sounds like a good idea.

Maybe we should have more free functions in general for algorithms,
like solve, assemble, refine, interpolate.

Member functions can be mostly for accessing or computing information
directly related to the object.

--
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature