On 29 January 2010 01:23, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> 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.
It would be good to have evaluate_basis_derivatives working, but I
don't know how much work is involved.
First my apologies for the late reply, Internet was down again all
morning and it pisses me off.
Now that BDM elements also compiles for gcc it looks like everything
is in place for evaluate_basis.
CG and CR elements work, and so does all linear elements and DG
constants. 2nd and 3rd order elements of BDM, RT, and DG type does not
give the same result but there are explanations for this and at least
it looks like they agree with the values you would get from FIAT if
you tabulate on the reference element.
evaluate_basis_derivatives works for CG elements and for most elements
of degree 1.
I'm working on some kind of unit testing framework for evaluate_basis
and evaluate_basis_derivatives, such that we can make sure that at
least cpp code and FIAT agrees on the reference element. If this test
works, then the only bug can be in the transformation back to the
physical element, but since this works for CG elements I don't see why
it shouldn't for other elements too.
However, I'll put this development on hold until Quadrature and
Restricted elements work.
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.
It should be implemented like I did it in the old FFC :)
w.r.t. the demo, it should test if restrictions on a MixedElement are
propagated to the sub elements and that a restricted element can
appear in a MixedElement.
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.
I think this sounds like a good plan. I'll work on getting
QuadratureElement up and running and the RestrictedElement.
If there are any bugs in evaluate_basis_derivatives we'll release it
in 0.9.1.
The code really needs some cleaning up, and we should also rearrange
some of the utility functions, but that can wait until 0.9.1.
Kristian
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).
--
Anders
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAktiKnAACgkQTuwUCDsYZdHEmgCcD3jSWQfDtVnNktS2+XMgQMhg
FkQAoJL6rELvZTzC+8fea5uMIYohDwUV
=aMac
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
