dolfin team mailing list archive

[Johan Hake <johan.hake@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday July 7 2011 12:21:26 Anders Logg wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 02:20:44PM +0200, Marie E. Rognes wrote:
> > Is the plan for 1.0-beta to fix
> > 
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ffc/+bug/787010
> > 
> > and then release?
> 
> Yes + decide on the interface for NonlinearVariationalProblem.
> 
> I think that should be all.
> 
> It would be good to hear more comments on the two suggestions:
> 
> 1. (current)
> 
>   NonlinearVariationalProblen(lhs, rhs, u, bcs, [J])
> 
>   This is consistent with LinearVariationalProblem and the solve()
>   functions; same order of arguments.
> 
> 2. (Garth)
> 
>   NonlinearVariationalProblen(lhs, u, bcs, [J])
> 
>   This removes the unnecessary rhs argument which always has to be
>   zero.
> 
> I think there are good arguments for both but not very strong so it's
> a matter of taste.

If:

  The point is that it makes the interface for all variational problems
  (linear or nonlinear) the same:

is the only reason, I go with Garth.

Johan