On 25 July 2011 19:33, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:16, Ethan Coon <ecoon at lanl.gov> wrote: >> >> It's not really a stand-alone script though, so it shouldn't get the >> hashbang or lose the extension. ?But it's not a full-fledged package of >> libraries either. ?I don't think it should be anywhere in the default path >> -- it's the kind of code that you should have to explicitly include (either >> via sys.path manipulation or via PYTHONPATH) because too many little scripts >> of utility code makes for a nasty, polluted namespace. ?There just isn't a >> good place (that I know of) in the standard file system hierarchy for this >> kind of stuff. > > Making the user/scripts do manual sys.path or PYTHONPATH manipulation makes > it nearly impossible to make portable scripts that depend on these > functions. Should we start a "proper" Python package containing PETSc > utilities? Then scripts could rely on > from petsc.io import binary_read > or whatever working. Of course it might only contain two functions right > now, but I could add my "petscplot" (makes various types of convergence and > scaling plots from convergence monitors and -log_summary output), and I'm > sure the community has other useful scripts.
Note however that "petsc" package is already registered in PyPI to make "pip install petsc4py" download and install PETSc. -- Lisandro Dalcin --------------- CIMEC (INTEC/CONICET-UNL) Predio CONICET-Santa Fe Colectora RN 168 Km 472, Paraje El Pozo 3000 Santa Fe, Argentina Tel: +54-342-4511594 (ext 1011) Tel/Fax: +54-342-4511169
