dolfin team mailing list archive

[Johan Hake <johan.hake@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday October 25 2010 03:01:55 Marie Rognes wrote:
> On 21. okt. 2010 17:22, Johan Hake wrote:
> > From a user perspective I think this is good. The user provides the
> > GoalFunctional, which is what she should care about.
> > 
> >   1) What if a user does not provide any goal functional, will a default
> >   be
> >   
> >      provided?
> 
> No.

Ok.
 
> >   2) Will it be possible to declare several goal functionals in one form?
> 
> Several goal functionals in one form?  I don't quite see what you mean:
> one form would define one goal functional.
> 
> Do you mean several goal functionals in one form file? 

Yes.

> That could be
> possible, but I'm not convinced that the added complexity would be worth
> while.
> 
> First and foremost, I think the ffc interface should be
> 
>     compile_with_error_control(F, M, ...)
> 
> as in one equation (F) (or (a, L)) + one goal (M).
> 
> The simplest parser of a ufl file would then use reserved names (a, L,
> M) for identification. Adding more intelligence to the parser could be
> possible, as in mapping
> 
>     (a, L, M0, M1) ->
> 
>     compile_with_error_control(a, L, M0)
>     compile_with_error_control(a, L, M1)

Ok!

Johan