libMesh currently supports overlapping boundary ids (which is good: e.g. the same boundary can be labeled with your application's NO_SLIP_FLOW id and with it's ISOTHERMAL_TEMP id). The easiest way to access boundary ids on sides has always been with BoundaryInfo::boundary_id(elem,side) (which is bad: boundary_id() returns the first id it sees and ignores all the rest) - looking at every id properly required getting a vector from boundary_ids() and then searching the vector.
We've now got a new API that's as easy to use for most simple cases: BoundaryInfo::has_boundary_id() (and something similar in FEMContext), which takes an id and returns true or false depending on whether that id is on the side. This has the advantage of letting you write one simple boundary-id-dependent physics class but not have that class break when it's composed with another physics class using different ids. Is it time to mark BoundaryInfo::boundary_id() with libmesh_deprecated(), then get rid of it in a couple years? --- Roy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;258768047;13503038;j? http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
