Sebastian,
> I'll use this as a learning example of how to contribute.
Great! Please do let us know if you need help with anything!
> Just to be sure that
> I'm not doing it overly complicated: If I only have an iterator to a face of
> a
> cell, there is no simple way of figuring out which face it is (in terms of
> the
> face number within the underlying cell), right?
Correct. You can ask a cell for its faces, and a face for its bounding edges
and vertices. But you can't ask questions in the other direction of this chain.
> I'm actually not concerned too much about whether the normal vector points
> inward or outward (although my preferred choice would be outward) since this
> is just a matter of definition. In my opinion, the main issue is that the
> behavior depends on the spatial dimension. So, I think the best trade-off
> between backward compatibility and consistency would be to retain the choice
> that the normal vector points inward and write a patch ensuring that this is
> also the case in 2D. Does this make sense?
Yes!
Best
W.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bange...@colostate.edu
www: http://www.math.colostate.edu/~bangerth/
--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
---
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
to dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
