Hi, I've recently been working on a "more fundamental" module than opm-core to investigate whether this is a good idea (hint: I think it is). Now it starts being in a shape where it works and where I would appreciate feedback. If you want to have a look at the code, you can find it here:
https://github.com/andlaus/opm-common I tentatively named this module "opm-common" in order to use the DUNE nomenclature, but this name seems to be a bit too close to opm-core, so a better name is appreciated. (Alternatively, renaming opm-core to something else ("baselibs"?) could be an option.) The rules for this module are quite simple: - Everything is a header file, i.e., it does not produce a library - No prerequisites (except, perhaps, boost) The primary motivation for it is to allow the 'opm-material' module to be usable without DUNE. This could make the material module useful for projects which are not fond on requiring DUNE (e.g., MRST). Another thing which could be done is to move the bulk of the build system to this module and leave only a shallow layer to find it in the other modules (which would somewhat amend the current divergence problems with the build system). One thing that I noticed during hacking on this module is that the OPM source- code file name conventions are a bit inconsistent: some modules use the .hh suffix for their headers, some use .hpp; some use CamelCase in file names (but interestingly enough not for directories), other use lowercase. IMHO we should formalize this a bit. I also volunteer to do the renaming if there is an consensus on this issue. Looking forward to your comments Andreas -- A programmer had a problem. He thought to himself, "I know, I'll solve it with threads!". has Now problems. two he -- Davidlohr Bueso
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Opm mailing list [email protected] http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm
