dolfin team mailing list archive
-
dolfin team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #23582
Re: [Branch ~dolfin-core/dolfin/main] Rev 5907: Comment out parts of test. There is something fishy with DofMap::tabulate_coordinates and the dou...
-
To:
Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>
-
From:
"Garth N. Wells" <gnw20@xxxxxxxxx>
-
Date:
Mon, 30 May 2011 22:16:48 +0100
-
Cc:
dolfin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
In-reply-to:
<20110530210300.GX25949@smaug>
-
User-agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10
On 30/05/11 22:03, Anders Logg wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 09:39:17PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 30/05/11 21:22, Johan Hake wrote:
>>> On Monday May 30 2011 12:54:14 noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> revno: 5907
>>>> committer: Garth N. Wells <gnw20@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> branch nick: dolfin-all
>>>> timestamp: Mon 2011-05-30 20:52:14 +0100
>>>> message:
>>>> Comment out parts of test. There is something fishy with
>>>> DofMap::tabulate_coordinates and the double pointers.
>>>
>>> Yes you are probably right. The double** typemap might be the problem. But
>>> doesn't it work for other similare situations, like set and get double**?
>>>
>>> It would be nice to get rid of all foo** arguments as these pose some troubles
>>> for the SWIG interface. I think we discussed this wrt the ufc interface too.
>>>
>>
>> I'm going to remove them. The double pointer for coords is a UFC
>> bug/design flaw.
>
> I wouldn't call it a design flaw. It was natural at the point of
> designing UFC to use an array of arrays for a list of coordinates.
> Designing for possible difficulties in creating SWIG typemaps was not
> part of the design process.
>
I'd call it a flaw (as does Martin). It imposes significant constraints
on the user. See
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ufc/+bug/787405
UFC uses plain pointers for other square arrays.
> But I agree it would be natural to replace the double pointers by
> simple pointers (or perhaps even std::vector?).
>
I suggest a plain pointer in UFC since this provides maximum
flexibility. My intention is to use boost::multi_array in the DOLFIN
interface.
> But is that something we should do now before the release of 1.0?
>
Why not? Even if we don't get it working in Python, it's not working
properly anyway.
Garth
> --
> Anders
>
>
>> Garth
>>
>>> Johan
>>>
>>>> modified:
>>>> dolfin/swig/fem_pre.i
>>>> test/unit/fem/python/test.py
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your team DOLFIN Core Team is subscribed to branch lp:dolfin.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this branch go to
>>>> https://code.launchpad.net/~dolfin-core/dolfin/main/+edit-subscription
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
Follow ups
References