| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
On 01/12/10 22:25, Johan Hake wrote:
On Wednesday December 1 2010 14:06:59 Anders Logg wrote:On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 01:51:01PM -0800, Johan Hake wrote:On Wednesday December 1 2010 11:19:28 noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 5346 committer: Garth N. Wells<gnw20@xxxxxxxxx> branch nick: dolfin-all timestamp: Wed 2010-12-01 19:15:42 +0000 message: Re-working of Function interfaces for removal of Data object. Nearly all test running, but logic needs to be checked. Problem remains with demos that use facet info. Also need to sort out determning whether or nor a ufc::cell belongs to a given mesh. modified:There is a whole bunch of functionality that is lost with not having access to a dolfin::Cell. Should this be added to ufc::cell?I assume we will keep all existing functionality in place, in particular the functions defined in SpecialFunctions.h.My point is that in the data argument you could access a dolfin::Cell. This you cannot do now. I think this is a no go if we cannot find a substitute for the lost functionality.
We haven't lost much, since nearly everything that was in SpecialFunctions.h is now in UFL/FFC. What remains (e.g. FacetArea) could probably go in UFC eventually.
What we can do is create a dolfin::Cell from a ufc::cell (since we can access the cell index from the ufc::cell object) if we know that the ufc::cell comes from the mesh at hand.
Garth
Johan _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : dolfin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
