On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, Vijay S. Mahadevan wrote: > I had to make few of the routines virtual in order to accomplish > that but since I did not see any of that in the existing design, I > assumed that EquationSystems was not supposed to be extendable as > is. But the new inclusions have got me all confused.
Your confusion is due to the fact that you're assuming our design is better than it is. ;-) The explanation is simple: In principle, we've thought that EquationSystems should be usable as a base class. In particular, I think that overriding solve() would be one of the more elegant ways to implement certain operator splitting and loose coupling algorithms. In practice, none of the primary developers have derived from EquationSystems, so features necessary to do it well may be missing because they've never been tested in practice. Which routines did you make virtual? There's nothing in EquationSystems that gets called from an inner loop, so there should be no objections to making more of its methods virtual in the SVN head. --- Roy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
