ffc team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:26:47PM +0100, Anders Logg wrote:
> The MetaData.ufl example is failing in the quadrature representation.
>
> Kristian, could you have a look and see what goes wrong. Then I can
> continue to make the incremental/combined integral stuff work.

On second thought, maybe we should skip the whole thing with having
different representations inside the same tabulate_tensor function
for the following reasons:

1. It leads to complications in the code generation.

2. It probably doesn't make much difference since if quadrature is
required for one part of an integral, then it is likely the cost is
low for including the other terms inside the existing quadrature loop.

3. The situation will not arise often since UFL will anyway group
terms with the same dx inside the same integral and then all will have
the same representation.

So the cases where this is useful are rare (because of the UFL
grouping), it won't give any speedup and it's complicated to
implement...

We will still have the possibility of different representations for
integrals on different subdomains and for cell, interior and exterior
facet integrals.

If this sounds ok, I can add some checks in analysis.py that force all
UFL integrals that will be grouped as part of the same UFC integral to
use the same representation.

Btw, does quadrature handle different quadrature degree for different
integrals that become part of the same tabulate_tensor? If not, we can
force metadata to be the same for all integrals that belong together.

--
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature