ffc team mailing list archive
-
ffc team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #00492
Re: format: [...]
-
To:
Discussion of FFC development <ffc-dev@xxxxxxxxxx>
-
From:
Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>
-
Date:
Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:25:56 -0600
-
In-reply-to:
<E1F1kRM-00049s-00@bamse>
-
Mail-followup-to:
Discussion of FFC development <ffc-dev@xxxxxxxxxx>
-
User-agent:
Mutt/1.5.9i
Will it help if we instead of passing a real& as argument to the form
pass a reference of type Constant (which we could need to create)?
The new class Constant would be very simple, just having a member
variable of type real called value. It would have a contstructor that
takes a real as argument, so a user could still just pass a constant
1.24 or so as the argument and have it automatically cast to a
Constant. Other users can do
Constant t = 0.0;
and pass t as an argument to the form and have it automatically
updated in the form when doing
t += k;
Then I suspect SWIG would not go in and assume pass-by-value, or does
it?
This would also make the treatment of Constant the same as for
Function, so that everything in FFC has a direct correspondance in
DOLFIN (Function -- Function, Constant -- Constant).
/Anders
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 02:12:00PM +0100, ffc@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Commit from johanjan (2006-01-25 14:11 CET)
> --------------------
>
> format:
>
> Constants passed (and stored) by value for DOLFIN-SWIG format. Python
> seems to pass stack-allocated values which won't work with storing
> references. Perhaps a Python/SWIG fix can be found for this later.
>
> ffc src/ffc/format/dolfinswig.py 1.2
>
> _______________________________________________
> FFC-dev mailing list
> FFC-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.fenics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ffc-dev
>
--
Anders Logg
Research Assistant Professor
Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago
http://www.tti-c.org/logg/
Follow ups
References