dolfin team mailing list archive

[Johan Hake <johan.hake@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday February 10 2011 09:36:18 Anders Logg wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 06:19:59AM -0800, Johan Hake wrote:
> > 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-pac
> > > >> >>>>>>>> kage 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
> 
> Great. So the conclusion is we move to SWIG 2.0 after the release of
> Ubuntu 11.04?

And after DOLFIN 0.9.10 I would say. I am pretty loaded for the moment...

Johan

> --
> Anders
> 
> > 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.
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin
> > > Post to     : dolfin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin
> > > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp