ffc team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 09:15:53AM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
> Anders Logg wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:01:59PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >>Anders Logg wrote:
> >>>We still haven't decided on the correct strategy for choosing the
> >>>degree of an unspecified element.
> >>>
> >>>What we have now looks at the total degree of the form and then sets
> >>>the degree accordingly. This doesn't really work weoull and the reason
> >>>is quite simple: We can't figure out the total degree correctly if we
> >>>don't know the degree of the coefficient.
> >>>
> >>>So my new suggestion is the following. We simply scan all elements in
> >>>the form with specified degrees and set the degree to the maximum
> >>>degree among the elements.
> >>>
> >>Or should it be the maximum degree of the test and trial functions?
> >
> >Yes, that's basically what happens now. It looks at everything that
> >has a degree so it looks at the test and trial functions but also at
> >any coefficients that may happen to have a degree.
> >
> >That's useful for say v*f*g*dx if one of f and g happen to have a
> >degree specified. Then the degree for the other needs to be the same.
> >
>
> Why?

Since that's how the generated quadrature code works. It loops over
quadrature points for an integrand and then it's useful if everything
in the integrand is evaluated at those points.

--
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature