On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 07:06:02PM +0200, Anders Logg wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 04:54:29PM -0000, Garth Wells wrote: > > On 21 September 2011 17:40, Johan Hake <787...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote: > > > On Wednesday September 21 2011 09:00:16 Garth Wells wrote: > > >> We should look at this - it will allow the removal of some ugly copies > > >> in DOLFIN. > > > > > > Agree, but at the moment are boost::multi_arrays not so pleasent for the > > > SWIG > > > interface. Copying is enforced. Not sure this is a big deal for such a low > > > lever functionality, but it is sad that it should be needed, if the > > > underlying > > > structure is just a c-array, which numpy wraps just fine. > > > > > > > I think that if this type of data is used intensively at the Python > > level, then there will be bigger performance issues to worry about > > than data copying. > > > > The multi_array interface is somewhat secondary - the important point > > is flattening the double pointer in the UFC interface. > > We should avoid using any other data structures than plain C arrays in > the UFC interface. > > Or we should use STL data structures (or boost) throughout UFC, but > that sounds more like UFC >= 3.0.
We should make a new UFC release to fix at least the bug in the quadrature version of tabulate_tensor for interior_facet_integral. Should we also change the double pointers into plain arrays? This would mean quite subtstantial changes as the following variables and arguments will need to change: cell::entity_indices cell::coordinates tabulate_tensor(..., w, ...) tabulate_tensor(..., quadrature_points, ...) This will also require changes DOLFIN and FFC/SFC and (perhaps the most time-consuming part...) in the UFC manual. -- 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
