dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:11:53AM -0700, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>
>
> On 30/08/11 08:51, Anders Logg wrote:
> > I've thought about this some more and I think that it can make sense
> > to template over type, not in MeshDomains itself but in a new class
> > MeshMarkers. The class MeshMarkers will be similar to MeshFunction but
> > differs in that it stores markers for only a subset and the markers
> > are identified by cell number and local entity number.
>
> Sounds good.

!

--
Anders


> Garth
>
> >Then
> > MeshDomains can use MeshMarkers internally (for uint).
> >
> > It does not make sense to template MeshDomains itself, as that should
> > be an integral part of the Mesh class and DOLFIN should interpret its
> > data during assembly and setting boundary conditions.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 29/08/11 10:43, Anders Logg wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 07:17:27AM -0700, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I had in mind that where you have 'uint subdomain' that this
> > should
> >>>> be templated so that any data can be attached.
> >>>
> >>> I thought of it but couldn't think of any good use for it
> >>
> >> Is that a good reason? ;)
> >>
> >>> so I decided
> >>> to go with 'uint'. Is there a compelling reason for it or can we add
> >>> it later if we should need it?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I don't think that it would be too difficult. I've used MeshFunctions
> >> with non-primitive data types, so I imagine that it could also be useful
> >> on subsets of entities.
> >>
> >> Garth
> >>
> >>>> Also, since objects could
> >>>> be attached to only a very small subset of mesh entities, is it
> >>>> necessary to create mesh functions? What about just a map/vector of tuples?
> >>>
> >>> The conversion to MeshFunctions is practical since it means we can
> >>> plug it directly into the assembler which relies on MeshFunctions for
> >>> checking the subdomain number of the current cell or facet. It might
> >>> be possible to do it the other way around, iterate over subdomains and
> >>> assemble on each, but that requires a rewrite of the assembler.
> >>>
> >>> For boundary conditions, the conversion is not necessary.
> >>>
> >>>> Garth
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 29/08/11 06:27, noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> revno: 6145
> >>>>> committer: Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>> branch nick: work
> >>>>> timestamp: Mon 2011-08-29 15:25:38 +0200
> >>>>> message:
> >>>>>   Add missing files
> >>>>> added:
> >>>>>   dolfin/mesh/MeshDomains.cpp
> >>>>>   dolfin/mesh/MeshDomains.h
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin
> >>>> Post to     : dolfin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin
> >>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >>
>