On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > Where will this lead to interface changes? >
Not at the user level. I had more in mind for some new additions, and maybe in cleaning up some low level interfaces. > Anyway, I think we should move to enums if it does not lead to big > complications with swig versions. Perhaps if there are significant interface > changes, we could make the next release FEniCS 2.0 in June Let's make a release before June, maybe 1.6? 2.0 and radical interface changes - I like the sound of it :). Garth (and perhaps it > should be 2.0 even without enums). > > -- > Anders > > > Tue Feb 17 2015 at 6:15:13 PM skrev Garth N. Wells <[email protected]>: >> >> For a while now, we've tended to use strings rather than enums in >> DOLFIN to make interfacing to Python easier. It may be a SWIG 3 >> things, but SWIG seems to handle enums really well now. From C++, >> enums are cleaner than strings, and from IPython we get tab-completion >> for enums. From Python, the enum syntax is close to the NumPy syntax >> for various things, e.g. np.inf. >> >> Is there any reason we should keep using strings over enums when enums >> are appropriate? Should we worry about SWIG 2 compatibility? >> >> Garth >> _______________________________________________ >> fenics mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics _______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
