dolfin team mailing list archive

[Johan Hake <johan.hake@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday February 10 2011 02:11:42 Johannes Ring wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:43:16AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >> On 10/02/11 09:39, Anders Logg wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:22:39AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >> >> On 10/02/11 09:19, Anders Logg wrote:
> >> >>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:11:26AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >> >>>> On 10/02/11 09:09, Anders Logg wrote:
> >> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 08:48:55AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >> >>>>>> On 10/02/11 07:38, Johan Hake wrote:
> >> >>>>>>> On Wednesday February 9 2011 23:32:55 Anders Logg wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 04:40:19PM -0800, Johan Hake wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>> Nice fix!
> >> >>>>>>>>> 
> >> >>>>>>>>> I thought we needed to introduce shared_ptr versions of
> >> >>>>>>>>> refinements call. But I realise this fix only work for SWIG
> >> >>>>>>>>> 2.0. As all shared_ptr_foo are renamed to foo.
> >> >>>>>>>>> 
> >> >>>>>>>>> We need to add an extra layer of %rename/%ignore for the SWIG
> >> >>>>>>>>> 2.0 case.
> >> >>>>>>>>> 
> >> >>>>>>>>> I can do this. But again it introduces another layer of
> >> >>>>>>>>> complexity you mention in your other post.
> >> >>>>>>>> 
> >> >>>>>>>> That didn't seem to work. The buildbot now says:
> >> >>>>>>>> 
> >> >>>>>>>> File
> >> >>>>>>>> "/home/fenicsslave/jhbuildbot/fenics/lib/python2.6/site-package
> >> >>>>>>>> s/dolfin/mes h/refine.py", line 30, in refine
> >> >>>>>>>>   return mesh.child_shared_ptr()
> >> >>>>>>>> TypeError: in method 'HierarchicalMesh_child_shared_ptr',
> >> >>>>>>>> argument 1 of type 'dolfin::Hierarchical< dolfin::Mesh > *'
> >> >>>>>>>> 
> >> >>>>>>>> What does that mean? mesh.child_shared_ptr() should return a
> >> >>>>>>>> shared_ptr to an object of class T (in this case Mesh), which
> >> >>>>>>>> it does in the C++ interface. It should not return a pointer
> >> >>>>>>>> to an object of class Hierarchical<T>.
> >> >>>>>>> 
> >> >>>>>>> It is related to the "fix" Garth introduced. He used
> >> >>>>>>> foo_shared_ptr, but that one does not work for SWIG < 2.0.
> >> >>>>>>> These methods are now ignored or renamed for all SWIG versions,
> >> >>>>>>> and everything should be well and fine for both versions of
> >> >>>>>>> SWIG.
> >> >>>>>> 
> >> >>>>>> I don't think that this is really a fix. The Python refine should
> >> >>>>>> return a shared_ptr, otherwise we can have problems with things
> >> >>>>>> going out of scope. The underlying problem is SWIG not wrapping
> >> >>>>>> the Mesh shared_ptrs properly.
> >> >>>>> 
> >> >>>>> But isn't that exactly what's happening now? The C++
> >> >>>>> shared_ptr_foo() functions are renamed to foo() so when you call
> >> >>>>> foo() in Python you get the shared_ptr.
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> That was my fix, which was reverted. Looks to me like a reference
> >> >>>> is returned.
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> From site-packages/dolfin/mesh/refine.py:
> >> >>> 
> >> >>>   return mesh.child()
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> From dolfin/swig/shared_ptr_classes.i:
> >> >>> 
> >> >>>    boost::shared_ptr<DERIVED_TYPE> child()
> >> >>>    { return self->child_shared_ptr(); }
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> So when mesh.child() is called in refine.py, it really returns
> >> >>> mesh.child_shared_ptr().
> >> >> 
> >> >> OK.
> >> >> 
> >> >> It' pretty confusing having stuff dotted around in different files.
> >> >> We'll be able to remove it when we moving to SWIG 2.
> >> > 
> >> > Is it the case that it won't be in Ubuntu 11.04 and we will have to
> >> > wait until 11.10?
> >> 
> >> It will be in 11.04, but the executable will be called swig2.0.
> >> 
> >> The sooner we can move, the better. Saves maintaining and testing double
> >> SWIG code.
> > 
> > Agree. The new name of the executable shouldn't be a problem.
> > 
> > Isn't it just a matter of (i) some fixes to the buildsystem for DOLFIN
> > (which I'm sure Johannes can handle) and (ii) some fixes to Instant
> > and the UFC wrapper utils?
> 
> It is only Instant that must be fixed.

It's on my todo list

Johan

> Johannes
> 
> >> > And what's the status of the Python Trilinos wrappers? Do we need
> >> > them? I guess there's a small chance that Trilinos will move to 2.0
> >> > any time soon.
> >> 
> >> The next PyTrilinos release will require SWIG 2.0. It should also fix
> >> the MPI finalisation issues.
> > 
> > ok.
> > 
> > --
> > Anders
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin
> > Post to     : dolfin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin
> Post to     : dolfin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp