ufl team mailing list archive

[Johan Hake <hake@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tuesday 31 March 2009 17:13:13 Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 01:06:36PM +0200, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:48 PM,  <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> I'm ok with the "forms / (a,L,M)" feature, and that pretty much
> >> >> solves the interpretation problem for (u,v) in that context.
> >> >> We should also have an optional list "elements" like "forms".
> >> >> I like
> >> >>   forms = [a, L]
> >> >> better, quotes are unnecessary.
> >> >
> >> > ok!
> >> >
> >> >> In the context of PyDOLFIN, PyDOLFIN can itself check for
> >> >> tuple or Form, so we don't need to check it everywhere.
> >> >
> >> > I don't think DOLFIN should need to check for this. Wouldn't it be
> >> > better to let the form compiler handle it?
> >> >
> >> > Which interfaces does SFC have? FFC has two interfaces:
> >> >
> >> > 1. The compile() command in FFC (takes a single object or list of
> >> > objects)
> >>
> >> compile is a builtin function in Python, so this should be renamed.
> >
> > Good point. I've been told this before (by Rob). Do you have a good
> > suggestion for a better name?
>
> I have
> def generate_code(input, options=None):
> def jit(input, options=None):

Will this be different if we let ufc take care of the jit compilation? 

I think,

  def generate_code(input, options=None):
  def signature(input, options=None):

make sense then.

Johan