ffc team mailing list archive

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

Anders Logg wrote:
> There seem to be just a couple of issues remaining in order of importance:
> 
> 1. QuadratureElement
> 
> 2. DOLFIN fem unit test
> 
> 3. evaluate_basis_derivatives
> 
> 4. RestrictedElement
> 
> Among these, I would say 1-2 are crucial to fix before 0.9.0,
> but 3-4 are less crucial.
>

Both 3 and 4 are crucial for me.

> It would be good to have evaluate_basis_derivatives working, but I
> don't know how much work is involved.
> 
> RestrictedElement is also good to have, but I would say it is less
> important, especially since it's unclear what exactly it should do and
> how it should be implemented.
> 
> We should also have the following in mind:
> 
> (i) The number of users relying on restricted elements is most likely
> very small and they are very likely using the development version
> anyway so if a fix for restricted elements comes next week, that will
> be ok.
> 
> (ii) If we make a release of 0.9.0 now and package it for Debian/Ubuntu,
> it is still possible to request Ubuntu to pull bug fixes for some
> time. So we can release 0.9.0 now and then 0.9.1 in a couple of weeks.
> 
> One of the reasons I'm pressing on with the release is the interface
> changes that we have made in both FFC and DOLFIN. It would be good to
> introduce these as early as possible to avoid confusion about how to
> write a form file (Coefficient, not Function) and how to implement
> Expressions (Array, not std::vector).
> 

I think that it's all being rushed. With the major re-write of FFC it
should be given some time for user testing. I would be amazed if my
various solvers do not show up bugs.

Garth

> --
> Anders
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
> Post to     : ffc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp