On 21/01/2010 14:19, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/21 <noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
------------------------------------------------------------
revno: 1502
committer: Marie E. Rognes <meg@xxxxxxxxx>
branch nick: ffc-unstable
timestamp: Thu 2010-01-21 15:13:40 +0100
message:
Fixes for covariant piola. Marie finally remembered why it should be
(j, i) instead of (i, j).
Cool, I guess this means that the indices is based on some theory after
all :)
Would the reason why the covariant Piola map doesn't contain a det(J)
but the contravariant Piola does be clarified on reading
RognesKirbyEtAl2009?