On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 01:51:08PM +0200, Anders Logg wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 01:50:07PM +0200, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote: > > Not sure, will have to get back to that. > > ok. > > > But wether we can use (a==L), (J==-F), (F==0) or just (a, L), (J, -F), (F, > > 0) > > is basically a purely aestetic difference with no functional difference. > > So the rest of the discussion can continue independently of this. > > Yes.
Martin, Any more thoughts on whether a == L and F == 0 can work with UFL? To sum up, I think we are looking at the following two options: 1. fancy Solver classes: solver = LinearVariationalSolver(a, L, ...) solver.solve() solver = NonlinearVariational(F, J, ...) solver.solve() Free functions: solve(a == L, ...) solve(F == 0, J, ...) The free functions call the solver classes. 2. less fancy Solver classes: same as above Free functions: solve(a, L, ...) solve(F, 0, J, ...) Note that in both cases, we specify lhs = rhs which means the distinction is no longer the order of arguments. One always specifies first lhs, then rhs. And one can easily check for the expected rank of the arguments and give sensible error messages. -- Anders _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
