ufl team mailing list archive

[Kristian Oelgaard <k.b.oelgaard@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoting Martin Sandve Alnæs <martinal@xxxxxxxxx>:

> 2008/8/20 Kristian Oelgaard <k.b.oelgaard@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just a quick question:
> >
> > Do you plan on including quadrature code generation in UFL?
> >
> > Kristian
> 
> More or less all my uses for UFL will be with quadrature.
> Although UFL doesn't care about how you integrate,
> this should be possible:
> 
> e = FiniteElement("Quadrature", triangle)
> f = Function(e)
> 
> I'm also considering
> 
> e = FiniteElement("Boundary Quadrature", triangle)
> f = Function(e)
> 
> for functions that need to be evaluated on the boundary.
> 
> Maybe quadrature order could be specified in FiniteElement?
> 
> e = FiniteElement("Boundary Quadrature", triangle, 4)
> 
> The default can be up to the form compiler, and the
> form compiler is free to override anyway.
> But we shouldn't allow this of course:
> 
> e1 = FiniteElement("Quadrature", triangle, 2)
> e2 = FiniteElement("Quadrature", triangle, 4)

This is close to the syntax we have in FFC now:

e1 = QuadratureElement(triangle, 2)
e2 = QuadratureElement(triangle, 4)

so it looks fine by me.

But this was not what I meant. I'm talking about the
output that UFL will generate in the tabulate_tensor() function. In FFC we have
tensor representation and quadrature representation. Will we also have both in
UFL?

Kristian


> f1 = Functino(e1)
> f2 = Functino(e2)
> a = f1*f2*dx
> 
> Anything you want to add?
> 
> --
> Martin
>