On Fri, 30 Apr 2010, Derek Gaston wrote:
On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:14 PM, Roy Stogner wrote:
I went a little *too* OO with FEMSystem - in hindsight there should
have been a separate subclassable Physics object to attach which
included the residual evaluation functions, and requiring subclassing
of FEMSystem itself was more work and less flexible.
Yeah - but all we're talking about here is an abstract base class that consists
of:
class ProblemInterface
{
public:
virtual void residual() = 0;
virtual void jacobian() = 0;
};
It's not going to be a huge burden...
Okay, I misunderstood what we were talking about then. This is just
fine - it effectively *is* what I was calling a "functor" approach,
despite it not being a plain "overload operator()". I thought you
were talking about requiring users to overload NonlinearSystem.
About backward compatibility: come on! This is adding _one_
argument to _two_ functions. Most codes will be able to fix this in
10 seconds! We can change it and announce it on libmesh-users and
it will be fine. If users are upset about that small of a change...
then they should be using a libMesh release instead of svn....
Fair enough. I'll leave the decision up to Ben; he's the first person
I thought of who would be affected.
---
Roy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
