On Mon, 20 Aug 2012, John Peterson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Roy Stogner <royst...@ices.utexas.edu> wrote: > >> Yeah, we'd definitely want to call the ABC PeriodicBoundaryBase so we >> could still instantiate PeriodicBoundary for backwards compatibility. > > OK, and I assume we'd like to maintain the "automatically invertible" > feature which is currently available at the base class level? > > I think this is possible, it just means the clone() function needs to > take an optional argument like the copy constructor.
Right, and right. There's no way to get around writing user inversion code for users who are creating new subclasses, but at least if they can use an existing subclass they should still be able to get away with creating only one "direction" of a PBC. --- Roy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
