dolfin team mailing list archive

[Harish Narayanan <harish.mlists@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 9/17/10 3:25 AM, Johan Hake wrote:
>>>>>> Why not add a volume method while at it? Maybe we should let these
>>>>>> be free functions as it does not always make sense to get an area
>>>>>> or volume of a mesh?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know what the dimension-independent terms are but most people
>>>>> would probably accept "area" as meaning the length of the boundary of
>>>>> a 2D domain.
>>>>
>>>> If I had a 2D mesh and it had a method area, I would definetly think
>>>> that it would return the area of that mesh. But that might be just
>>>> me...
>>>
>>> Anders is talking about the area of Face/Facet of a 2D mesh which is
>>> where this discussion originated from.
>>>
>>> Kristian
>>
>> I agree it might be confusing. Perhaps measure() and
>> boundary_measure() would work?

The above, for me, would really be a lot less ambiguous.

> What whith:
> 
>   measure(std::string type)
> 
> which then takes a "volume", "area", or "length" argument together with an 
> optional MeshFunction and subdomain?

This would likely just reintroduce the problem. The original concern
here seems to have stemmed from the contextual meaning of word "area."

Harish