On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Garth N. Wells <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2014-01-28 21:06, Anders Logg wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 08:33:38PM +0100, Johan Hake wrote: >> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Martin Sandve Alnæs <[email protected] >>> > >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> What if we move ufc.h to dolfin? Keeping the ufcutils module in ffc. >>> Then >>> we can maybe write a test that checks if a given ffc generates ufc >>> code >>> that implements the ufc interface of a given dolfin. >>> >>> >>> Sounds like a good idea! Then we could incorporate the CMake configure >>> process >>> into DOLFIN CMake. We have also loosely talked about removing UFC and >>> eventually generate DOLFIN code, which resonates with moving UFC to >>> DOLFIN. >>> >> >> I am not convinced this is a good idea: >> >> > I'm not convinced either - doesn't seem like a natural split. How about: > > 1. We try letting distutils take care of building the SWIG wrappers in > place of CMake: > > http://docs.python.org/2/distutils/setupscript.html# > extension-source-files > > or; > This was the case before we added shared_ptr to ufc. Then we decided to add boost and a proper configure system was needed for that. Not sure we want to go back to distutils. One option could be to hide the CMake logic within the setup.py file. We could define special build target for ufc configuration and compilation and passsing the arguments to a cmake call. It sounds doable but could probably be quite convoluted... 2. UFC just provides the SWIG .i files, and lets the library wanting the > SWIG wrappers do the compilation? It is somewhat strange to let another library generate a python extension module. Johan > > > Garth > > + Only DOLFIN uses ufc.h anyway >> + Simplifies build system(s) >> + More flexibility when changing the code generation interface >> >> - No clear versioning that tells us which interface FFC and DOLFIN >> talk through >> >> - UFC was once introduced to solve a problem we had which was that >> changes were often made to both FFC and DOLFIN and users needed >> to know which version matched. >> >> -- >> Anders >> _______________________________________________ >> fenics mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics >> >
_______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
