On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Derek Gaston wrote:
Personally... just force people to inherit from the base class and
override virtuals. It's not _that_ much work.... That's what we do
in MOOSE and it's been working well....
Also: Screw backward compatibility. libMesh has been moving away
from function pointer stuff for a while (like Ben's new
NonlinearSystem stuff). Let's move to an all object oriented
interface (we can move there slowly by re-engineering each system
separately). The function pointer stuff has always been an oddity
in libMesh for me... it seems so out of place with all the other
object-oriented stuff we have going on...
Your advice is appreciated, but more so is your reminder: why am I
bending over backwards to make one set of member functions work with
two completely different types of input parameters, when I can just
add separate overloaded member functions like Ben did? The fptr based
functions can then wrap the pointer themselves and hand off to the
functor based functions, no clone method needed and no backwards
compatibility lost.
Thanks,
---
Roy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-devel mailing list
Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
