dolfin team mailing list archive

[Johannes Ring <johannr@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Johan Hake <johan.hake@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wednesday February 2 2011 07:57:10 Garth N. Wells wrote:
>> On 02/02/11 15:46, Johan Hake wrote:
>> > On Wednesday February 2 2011 02:31:02 Johannes Ring wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:39 AM, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>> On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 11:35:28PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>> >>>> On 01/02/11 23:19, Johan Hake wrote:
>> >>>>> On Tuesday February 1 2011 15:14:21 Anders Logg wrote:
>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 03:12:05PM -0800, Johan Hake wrote:
>> >>>>>>> On Tuesday February 1 2011 14:53:55 Anders Logg wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> Something seems to go wrong with the Hierarchical Python wrappers.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> C++ program:
>> >>>>>>>>   UnitSquare mesh(3, 3);
>> >>>>>>>>   mesh._debug();
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Output:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Debugging hierarchical object.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>   has_parent()    = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _parent.get()   = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _parent.count() = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   has_child()     = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _child.get()    = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _child.count()  = 0
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Debugging hierarchical object.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>   has_parent()    = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _parent.get()   = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _parent.count() = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   has_child()     = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _child.get()    = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _child.count()  = 0
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Python program:
>> >>>>>>>>   mesh = UnitSquare(3, 3)
>> >>>>>>>>   mesh._debug()
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Debugging hierarchical object.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>   has_parent()    = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _parent.get()   = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _parent.count() = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   has_child()     = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _child.get()    = 0
>> >>>>>>>>   _child.count()  = 0
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Debugging hierarchical object.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>   has_parent()    = 1
>> >>>>>>>>   _parent.get()   = cbd47290
>> >>>>>>>>   _parent.count() = -878438560
>> >>>>>>>>   has_child()     = 1
>> >>>>>>>>   _child.get()    = cbd47290
>> >>>>>>>>   _child.count()  = -878438560
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> The first call to Hierarchical::_debug is made from the
>> >>>>>>>> constructor of Hierarchical and is correct in both C++ and
>> >>>>>>>> Python, but then the Python object seems to lose contact with the
>> >>>>>>>> reality.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Yes quite so...
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I changed locally to swig 2.0 and the problem went away. shared_ptr
>> >>>>>>> support has been rewritten in 2.0. I might be able to hack the
>> >>>>>>> interface of Hierarchical in a similar manner as I did for
>> >>>>>>> Variables. Just implementing the interface again in the C++ layer.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> But I am not sure. The shared_ptr part of the SWIG interface starts
>> >>>>>>> to be quite complex now with supporting SWIG version 1.3.37 to
>> >>>>>>> 1.3.40 and 2.0
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Maybe we should force SWIG 2.0?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Is that possible? It's not in Ubuntu yet, or is it?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It's in 11.04
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Swig is super easy to install.
>> >>>
>> >>> If we can include SWIG installation in Dorsal and Johannes is able to
>> >>> make packages that rely on SWIG 2.0 then we might as well move to 2.0
>> >>> to save us (mainly Johan) a lot of trouble.
>> >>
>> >> I tried to build UFC and DOLFIN in Debian unstable with the swig2.0
>> >> package (same package as in Ubuntu 11.04). One problem is that this
>> >> package does not contain /usr/bin/swig but only /usr/bin/swig2.0. I
>> >> fixed this by setting -DSWIG_EXECUTABLE:FILEPATH=/usr/bin/swig2.0 when
>> >> building UFC and DOLFIN, but running the poisson Python demo failed
>> >> because Instant was unable to find swig. The reason for naming the
>> >> binary "swig2.0" is probably that SWIG 1.3 is still the default in
>> >> Debian (and Ubuntu).
>> >
>> > Ok then it might be difficult. We could maybe add some funcitonality to
>> > instant to define what executable it shold look for?
>>
>> We should definitely have that - DOLFIN should be able to pass the Swig
>> executable name and path. I've already seen that having two versions of
>> Swig installed is problematic.
>
> Ok, then we need some hierachical setting of what swig excecutable it should
> look for. As I am compiling swig from source, which gives me a plain 'swig'
> excecutable I would not like DOLFIN to use this and not swig2.0.
>
> I can see if I can implement this. We can add something like:
>
>  parameters["jit_compilation"]["swig_executable"] = "swig2.0"
>  parameters["jit_compilation"]["swig_version"] = "2.0.0"
>
> If swig2.0 is not found we look for swig. I think we can do this from dolfin
> (using instant). When we have found the correct swig executable we cache it
> and use it when we call instant.
>
> I am not sure how setting the path will work. If we include it I think it
> should be optional. So that just looking in the path after the excecutable
> should be the default option.

FYI: I just thought of another problem with moving to SWIG 2.0. The
Trilinos package in Debian and Ubuntu is not built with SWIG 2.0. This
means that I must build the DOLFIN package without support for
Trilinos.

Johannes