On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 12:55 +0100, Anders Logg wrote: > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:37:23AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote: > > > > > > On 28/01/11 11:33, Mehdi Nikbakht wrote: > > > On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 11:25 +0100, Andre Massing wrote: > > >> Den 28.01.11 00.30, skrev Anders Logg: > > >>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:10:08PM +0100, Anders Logg wrote: > > >>>> I would like to add factory functions in UFC, in particular > > >>>> > > >>>> finite_element* finite_element::create() const; > > >>>> dof_map* dof_map::create() const; > > >>>> > > >>>> Are there any objections to this? It would be easy to add and easy to > > >>>> implement in FFC. > > >>>> > > >>>> I need it to implement refinement of FunctionSpaces in DOLFIN where > > >>>> fresh copies of ufc::finite_element and ufc::dof_map are needed given > > >>>> a ufc::finite_element or ufc::dof_map. > > >>>> > > >>>> An alternative is to hack create_sub_foo so that it returns a copy of > > >>>> the element/dofmap itself if the component argument 'i' is>= the > > >>>> number of sub elements/dofmaps. > > >>> > > >>> I suggest we add this to UFC 1.6 and make a release next week together > > >>> with DOLFIN 0.9.10, FFC 0.9.5 + other packages that need release. The > > >>> sooner the better: there will be time to make bug fix releases and > > >>> things will be tested before 1.0 in March. > > >>> > > >>> If there are any other things we want to add to UFC, now's a good > > >>> time. > > >> > > >> What about the tabulate_tensor function taking arguments for runtime > > >> quadrature rules, as we discussed a while ago? ATM I hacked UFC and my > > >> generated form files having an additional function > > >> > > >> virtual void tabulate_tensor(double* A, > > >> const double * const * w, > > >> const ufc::cell& c, > > >> dolfin::uint num_quad_points, > > >> const double * const * coordinates, > > >> const double * weights) const > > >> > > >> Such an interface would add a flexible layer for those who wants to have > > >> some type of runtime quadrature. > > >> > > >> General opinons about that? > > > > > > Although this makes life easier for the case that we have to compute > > > quadrature rule in the run-time, but the current interface can also > > > handle this problem. You can derive a class form ufc::foo_integrals and > > > pass object containing new gauss quadrature rule to its constructor as > > > we do for partition of unity method. > > How is that possible? I assume you make a subclass and implement the > tabulate_tensor functions yourself using the points given in the > constructor. That's fine, but the point here would be that FFC > generates the code for us and the generated code would use the > quadrature points.
Yes, we generate required code for tabulate_tensor using ffcpum. The most important point is runtime evaluation of basis function and their derivatives using object of ufc::finite_element at the given quadrature points. The approach used for run-time computation of quadrature points is a secondary issue. These quadrature points can be given to the constructor of foo_integrals (as we it do now) or can be passed through tabulate_tensor(as the proposed interface can do). Mehdi > > I think that the proposed interface change would make the above process > > simpler. > > If we agree it's a good interface, we could put it in now for 1.6. It > will make it easier once we implement since no change in UFC will be > needed at that point. > > -- > Anders > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
