On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:22:12AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Anders Logg <l...@simula.no> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:32:11AM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: > >> We have discussed briefly in the past changing from unsigned int > >> (typedef uint) to std::size_t. Starting to solve some really big > >> problems and some changes in Trilinos make it a good time to bring > >> this up again. Any thoughts or objections to moving to std::size_t > >> from uint? > > > > I think this would be a good idea. > > > > I've started making some unsigned int -> std::size_t changes as I > restructure mesh partitioning. > > > I suggest we keep the uint typedef and make it point to size_t. > > > > I think we should use std::size_t and not uint. std::size_t is already > a typedef and it conveys an intention: big enough for the largest > array that can be allocated on a machine. Also, it's not a question > of unsigned int or std::size_t - there are places for both.
So we will keep dolfin::uint for stuff like component indices and other small integers, and use size_t for everything that can potentially be large? How about the Mesh? Should we use size_t for stuff like mesh connectivity? -- 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
