Dear John, On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, John Peterson wrote: > >> This one I disagree with. Inheritance should always follow the "is a" >> organizational semantic, and a SparseMatrix (as we now define it) is >> most definitely *not* a ShellMatrix. > > Nor is a ShellMatrix a SparseMatrix. What I mean is that SparseMatrix has all the functionality that ShellMatrix requires plus a lot of extra functionality. If we had a MatrixBase as Roy suggests, then what would be the additional functionality of ShellMatrix with respect to MatrixBase? I can't see any. Hence, what about renaming ShellMatrix to MatrixBase and then deriving SparseMatrix from that class? 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
