I think this makes sense... and have thought about doing it myself. One reason to still use an ExplicitSystem (or actually a TransientExplicitSystem) is because you might need old values. So if you're going to do this should we make a "TransientSystem" as well that just has solution vectors for current, old and older in it with no RHS?
Derek On Jun 9, 2011, at 9:07 AM, Roy Stogner wrote: > > So here's a simple question I should have come up with years ago: Why > do we suggest *Explicit*System for storing element data? That system > allocates a rhs vector for use in solve(), but if you're only wanting > to store (and project, distribute, read/write...) data fields then the > rhs is just a slight waste of memory. > > A couple small changes are enough to make System itself a > constructable class. Should I commit those, or am I missing some > reason for making System an abstract base class? > --- > Roy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content > authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image > Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Libmesh-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Libmesh-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users
