On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311) wrote:
Yeah, I still use these, and would miss them if they were gone!
Any chance I could talk you into not missing them? Or learn from you
why you prefer dphidx[i][qp] over dphi[i][qp](0)? One of these days
I'd like to add additional compile-time options for our FE data arrays
(mostly to enable users to fix those stride problems and/or use third
party multiarray classes), and it would be convenient to get rid of
the redundant data at the same time while I was digging around in that
code.
At the very least it would be nice to add a compile-time
--disable-dphidx type option to actually see whether all the extra
copies actually matter or not.
---
Roy
On Jul 18, 2012, at 1:31 AM, "Paul T. Bauman" <ptbau...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Roy Stogner <royst...@ices.utexas.edu>
wrote:
Two generic reasons for storing separate scalar components:
Backwards compatibility. IIRC the dphidx etc. arrays existed first,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-devel mailing list
Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
