Thank you for your answer! It was a bit surprising as soon as the second 
author is a lead dev of MFEM.

I suppose that you are still using or going to use deal.ii, making a 
real-life example of its advanced usage to be public  will help the 
progress to go on. This way you will have a better tool in your hands and 
it worth to spend a fraction of the time you have already spent on 
developing the code. I believe that just pushing  the project to GitHub 
should not be too time-consuming, if you can provide a preprint of the 
paper - it will be a great piece of documentation to such kind of program.

There are very few examples of using Nedelec elements, mostly in 
deal.ii/test, any full-fledged example is really welcomed. I think that at 
some point deal.ii will become more covered with production level apps, 
able to solve challenging problems, making it much easier to start for 
engineers and physicist without a special education.

Best regards,

On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 3:25:28 PM UTC+2, Alexander wrote:
> Konstantin,
> 1. I had already some experience with deal.II by the time we started to 
> work on efficient solver and high-order implementation. It was the easiest 
> way. 
> 2. Going open-source properly requires a significant time investments. 
> Since I'm not in a CS or applied math department, it's quite difficult to 
> justify this time spending at this stage. But I hope to be able to do it 
> one day. 
> Best,
> Alexander
> Am Dienstag, 11. Oktober 2016 10:33:01 UTC+2 schrieb Konstantin Ladutenko:
>> Hi Alexander,
>> I added a short description of your paper to 
>> and 
>> provided your reference, fill free to improve it and the page in general. 
>> I had also done a short review of a series of papers on time-domain, 
>> noticeably there is a great paper by Rieben, Rodrigue, and White in 2005 
>> about solving it with high-order elements using a symplectic algorithm for 
>> time-stepping (probably you can find interesting). 
>> I have two short questions on your paper:
>> 1) Why did you choose to use Deal.ii instead of MFEM, mentioned in the 
>> paper?
>> 2) Did you considered to put your code into deal.ii code gallery? Making 
>> it open-sourced should increase the impact of your paper and will help the 
>> deal.ii community.
>> Best regards,
>> Kostya
>> On Monday, October 10, 2016 at 9:02:21 PM UTC+2, Alexander wrote:
>>> Hi Konstantin,
>>> you may want to look at our work: 
>>> It's a very efficient approach for frequency domain formulation, in 
>>> particular for problems with < 100M DoFs. The FEM part in the 
>>> aforementioned paper is written using deal.II.
>>> Best,
>>> Alexander

The deal.II project is located at
For mailing list/forum options, see
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"deal.II User Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
For more options, visit

Reply via email to