On 08/28/2012 02:44 PM, Roy Stogner wrote: > > > On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, John Peterson wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:16 PM, David Knezevic >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I agree, it'd be good to handle that in this function, but I was >>> originally >>> planning to do that in user code. The main reason for that is that I >>> wanted >>> to make use of extra info that I have, e.g. which mesh connects with >>> which >>> other mesh, and the boundary IDs of the mesh interfaces. I don't >>> really want >>> to put all the logic inside this union function... >> >> OK... I just worry that people will use this function and the >> resulting mesh without reading the documentation carefully, and get a >> nasty surprise. > > Likewise. I'd assumed that the MeshTools::_build_mesh_union() would > merely be a factored-apart building block for the more useful APIs. > If the more complete methods don't end up existing in library code (or > at least examples), I'm not sure how useful the bare building block > will be.
OK, well I'd be happy to add the complete API, as long as we're happy to assume that the meshes are conforming on the interfaces, and that the user provides all the necessary connectivity info (essentially a "meta-mesh" data structure) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Libmesh-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users
