Dear John, Thank you for your comments.
If you like to unify SparseMatrix and ShellMatrix after commiting my patch, I would find that completely agreeable. I would guess that it's a lot more difficult than it looks like on first glance, but I might be wrong. One problem would be that this makes it more difficult to differentiate (e.g. in LinearSolver::solve()) which type of matrix is actually present. On the other hand, that might easily be solvable using some dynamic_cast statements (which I am not too familiar with). Also, I would suggest to derive SparseMatrix from ShellMatrix rather than vice versa. This could actually make SparseShellMatrix unnecessary. This is of course an advantage of the unification. By the way, my application seems to get incorrect results at the moment, and I have to find out whether the error is on the ShellMatrix side or on the application side. Since every test run takes several hours, you should have some more patience. Also, the cluster is still not usable, so that I cannot test in parallel. Best Regards, Tim -- Dr. Tim Kroeger Phone +49-421-218-7710 [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax +49-421-218-4236 MeVis Research GmbH, Universitaetsallee 29, 28359 Bremen, Germany Amtsgericht Bremen HRB 16222 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Dr. H.-O. Peitgen ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Libmesh-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users
