ufl team mailing list archive

[Johan Hake <johan.hake@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday August 8 2011 11:10:00 Anders Logg wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 10:26:07AM -0700, Johan Hake wrote:
> > On Monday August 8 2011 09:48:26 Anders Logg wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 08:35:05AM -0700, Johan Hake wrote:
> > > > On Monday August 8 2011 05:31:41 Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
> > > > > On 6 August 2011 09:24, Johan Hake <johan.hake@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > Hello!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > When you print a form to get its str representation in pydolfin
> > > > > > it is severaly polluted by the layer DOLFIN add to especially
> > > > > > Function.__str__.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I know this is PyDOLFIN's fault, but would it be possible to let
> > > > > > the pretty print algorithm in ufl use some internal str function
> > > > > > instead of __str__ when the str representation of a form is
> > > > > > gathered. Coefficient.__str__ could then just call that function
> > > > > > and from ufl it would just be the same.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Johan
> > > > > 
> > > > > Not sure what you mean here. I don't see a solution that
> > > > > doesn't involve changing all __str__ functions in ufl.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes this would probably be required. I guess that was a "no that wont
> > > > happen"
> > > > 
> > > > :)
> > > > 
> > > > Then I am inclined to let Function.__str__ just use
> > > > ufl.Coefficient.__str__.
> > > 
> > > Is it not possible to use some kind of downcasting to make sure that
> > > ufl.Coefficient.__str__ is used in pretty-print from PyDOLFIN?
> > 
> > There are no downcasting in Python ;)
> > 
> > But you can dynamically call another function depending on who is looking
> > at an object. That was my original solution. This have to be implemented
> > in ufl, which would be the caller in this case. But creating a special
> > solution for Coefficient would not be satisfactory, so one would need to
> > do some sort of change through out the whole library, which is not cool,
> > I guess.
> > 
> > > I'm not sure removing the dolfin.Function information is a good option.
> > 
> > I tend to agree. But printing a form create so much polution in terms of
> > Function string representation that it become useless. We could move the
> > verbose information in todays Function.__str__ to Function.str. Then we
> > would
> > 
> > trigger that information by taking:
> >   >>> info(u)
> >   
> >   <Function in <Function space of dimension 9 (<CG1 on a <triangle cell
> >   in
> > 
> > R2>>)>>
> > 
> > Then we need to make sure that Function.__str__ maps to
> > Coeffcicient.__str__.
> > 
> > A nice compromise?
> 
> Sounds like a clever solution to me.

Done. 

Johan