I am in favour of a(u,v), simply because it is the way I am used to read and write it. Also, very few users need to care about this due to the high-level syntax in UFL which implicitly takes care of the ordering.
Kent On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 09:23 +0200, Anders Logg wrote: > There doesn't seem to be any overwhelming pressure to change the > notation from a(v, u) to a(u, v). More opinions? > > In summary, the options are: > > 1. Keep a(v, u) so that A_ij = a(phi_i, phi_j) > > 2. Change to a(u, v) and do some kind of swapping of indices > > 3. Change to a(u, v) and change to A_ij = a(phi_i, phi_j) > > Option 3 seems unreasonable (although one could argue this is where > the problem lies, columns should be numbered first). > > -- > Anders > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
