2008/12/3 Anders Logg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 01:48:49PM +0100, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote: >> 2008/12/3 Anders Logg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 01:08:51PM +0100, Johan Hake wrote: >> >> On Wednesday 03 December 2008 13:01:33 Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote: >> >> > 2008/12/3 Anders Logg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> > > On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 12:24:38PM +0100, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote: >> >> > >> 2008/12/3 Anders Logg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> > >> > Another thing I've been wondering about is the renaming of >> >> > >> > dolfin::Function to dolfin.cpp_Function. Is this really necessary? >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > If we just removed the renaming, I guess it would still work out. >> >> > >> > So >> >> > >> > we would create classes in function.py that inherit from >> >> > >> > ffc.Function >> >> > >> > and dolfin.Function (instead of dolfin.cpp_Function). >> >> > >> >> >> > >> How? >> >> > > >> >> > > By just writing dolfin.Function instead of dolfin.cpp_Function in >> >> > > function.py. >> >> > > >> >> > > In function.py, we import the SWIG-generated module "dolfin": >> >> > > >> >> > > import dolfin; >> >> > > >> >> > > This module may then contain a class named "Function" which is the >> >> > > SWIG-generated wrapper for dolfin::Function (currently named >> >> > > cpp_Function). We may then define a class named "Function" in the >> >> > > function.py module, and this is the class that we import in the >> >> > > top-level __init__.py (not the one from dolfin.dolfin). >> >> > > >> >> > > Does it make sense? >> >> > >> >> > So you mean >> >> > >> >> > dolfin.dolfin.Function == dolfin.cpp_Function >> >> > dolfin.Function is a subclass of dolfin.dolfin.Function >> >> > >> >> > ? >> >> > >> >> > How does this make anything clearer? >> >> > It only obfuscates what's being done, >> >> > creates another namespace issue, and >> >> > makes it even more difficult to talk about >> >> > functions in dolfin. >> >> >> >> I have actually been thinking in the same lanes as Anders. But keeping a >> >> distinction to the compiled dolfin module in the module name instead as >> >> cpp_dolfin. >> >> >> >> from dolfin import * >> >> >> >> Then the compiled version of some classes would be: >> >> >> >> cpp_dolfin.Function aso. >> >> >> >> But I see that we can introduce namespace troubles if some one >> >> accidentally >> >> imports from cpp_dolfin. >> >> >> >> Johan >> > >> > Yes, that's even better. >> > >> > SWIG generates wrappers for the classes in the C++ interface. These >> > classes go into a module named "cpp_dolfin", or maybe just "cpp". >> > >> > Then we define the Python interface in the top-level __init__.py where >> > we either import classes directly from cpp or define new classes >> > (maybe based on the cpp classes). >> > >> > I suggest we name the module just cpp since it will be a submodule of >> > DOLFIN so the "dolfin"-context is clear. >> > >> > This would make it possible to do things like >> > >> > from dolfin.cpp import Function >> > from dolfin.cpp import Mesh >> > >> > etc. >> > >> > The Mesh in dolfin and dolfin.cpp happen to be the same, but not for >> > Function. >> >> cpp is good. > > Good, anyone knows how to implement it? > > -- > Anders
Simply replace "import dolfin" with "import dolfin as cpp" and replace "dolfin" with "cpp" in all pydolfin code. -- Martin _______________________________________________ DOLFIN-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
