fenics team mailing list archive

["Garth N. Wells" <gnw20@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/05/10 08:48, Kent Andre wrote:
> I am in favour of a(u,v), simply because it is the way I am used to
> read and write it. Also, very few users need to care about this due to
> the high-level syntax in UFL which implicitly takes care of the
> ordering.

They do need to worry about it on the DOLFIN side with the creation of a 
Form:

   Poissin::Bilinearform a(V0, V1);

Garth

> Kent
>
> On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 09:23 +0200, Anders Logg wrote:
> > There doesn't seem to be any overwhelming pressure to change the
> > notation from a(v, u) to a(u, v). More opinions?
> >
> > In summary, the options are:
> >
> > 1. Keep a(v, u) so that A_ij = a(phi_i, phi_j)
> >
> > 2. Change to a(u, v) and do some kind of swapping of indices
> >
> > 3. Change to a(u, v) and change to A_ij = a(phi_i, phi_j)
> >
> > Option 3 seems unreasonable (although one could argue this is where
> > the problem lies, columns should be numbered first).
> >
> > --
> > Anders
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> > Post to     : fenics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp