On 2014-01-30 10:25, Jan Blechta wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:08:16 +0000
"Garth N. Wells" <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2014-01-30 09:37, Corrado Maurini wrote:
> Is there a reason for which there is not an option in
> NonlinearVariationalSolver to choose how to impose boundary
> conditions (symmetric or not)?
>
> As a user of PETScSNESSolver I completely agree with Patrick with
> the usefulness of an intermediate class or something similar.
>
> I think that there the current argument naming in PETScSNESSolver is
> misleading.
> In PETScSNESSolver::solve(NonlinearProblem, x), NonlinearProblem is
> actually a NonlinearDiscreteProblem.
That's not correct. NonlinearDiscreteProblem is a NonlinearProblem.
> Hence the user must implement its own NonlinearDiscreteProblem to
> use directly PETScSNESSolver.
No. A user implements a NonlinearProblem.
> If NonlinearDiscreteProblem was public, or at least accessible by
> PETScSNESSolver, one could easily overload PETScSNESSolver::solve to
> get as input a real NonlinearProblem (and not only the Discrete
> version as now).
> Perhaps it suffices to render PETScSNESSolver and
> NonlinearVariationalSolver friend classes?
>
This doesn't make sense. The design is simple: a user implements a
NonlinearProblem.
Garth, the whole story is pretty simple:
why can't user access NonlinearDiscreteProblem to be able to overload
some of its methods (F, J) when using
NonlinearVariationalProblem/Solver
interface (like he can (actually must) do with NonlinearProblem when
using NewtonSolver or PETScSNESSolver).
We could provide 100s of ways of doing everything, but we make design
choices. Anders has already addressed the design at the start of this
thread:
http://fenicsproject.org/pipermail/fenics/2014-January/001077.html
Garth
Jan
Garth
> Corrado
>
> Le 30 janv. 2014 à 09:54, Patrick Farrell
> <[email protected]> a écrit :
>
>> On 29/01/14 21:45, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>>> I'd say that it's pointless
>>
>> Wouldn't the correct behaviour be to apply the BCs symmetrically?
>>
>>> and terribly misleading.
>>
>> I agree with you there.
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> fenics mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
>
> _______________________________________________
> fenics mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
_______________________________________________
fenics mailing list
[email protected]
http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
_______________________________________________
fenics mailing list
[email protected]
http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
