On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Benjamin Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> Roy's right, that's not the problem, but I think this is: >>>> >>>> MeshBase::const_element_iterator el = >>>> mesh.local_elements_begin(); >>> >>>> What happens if you change the loop to >>>> >>>> MeshBase::const_element_iterator el = >>>> mesh.active_local_elements_begin(); >>> >>> That'd do it. Didn't David or someone do this once too? It's an easy >>> mistake to make. We ought to add a warning message somehow... maybe >>> when an FE object is reinit'ed using a grandparent or higher element? >> >> I've wondered about what we could do about this problem as well. At >> the time of instantiation of a regular element iterator, in debug >> mode, we might be able to check the mesh for the presence of ancestor >> elements, and warn that you may be iterating over an improper subset >> of elements. > > I wonder if we should just change the examples - there are a number of > places in the library we loop over level-0 elements... The only point in > *not* using them early in the examples is to introduce them as a new concept > later on, but that does not seem like a very compelling reason.
Changing the examples is a good idea as well. We could still differentiate between active and active_local, for parallel problems, if desired. -- John ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
