On Sun, 27 Jan 2013, Derek Gaston wrote:
I set about filling out the SolutionTransfer system tonight... and I realized
that the code I was writing was pretty high level... and not very libMesh
like. I was hiding quite a lot and assuming quite a lot... and providing
interfaces that might not be optimal in certain circumstances.
So, here's what I'm thinking... I'm going to do away with the SolutionTransfer
system in libMesh... and undo the work I was doing. I'll move the DTK
functionality to "misc" and redo the example I added to not use the (now
deleted) DTKSolutionFunction... but just use the DTK interface classes I made
instead.
I think that the MeshfreeInterpolation stuff that Ben has in there along with
the DTK interfaces provide good library functionality. People can wrap those
up the way that want, if they want.
What do you guys think?
I loved the idea of having a higher-level abstract API that could be
instantiated with either Ben's stuff or yours. It wouldn't even have
to be a *big* API - see MeshInput/MeshOutput/SolutionHistory for a few
examples where the abstract base class just can't say much about
implementations and so can't be very complicated.
But if there's no good way to factor those together then there's no
good way; I'd trust your judgement on that.
---
Roy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-devel mailing list
Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
