On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 10:33:02 +0200, "Jose E. Roman" <jroman at dsic.upv.es> wrote: > By the way, TSCRANK_NICHOLSON is not spelled correctly, should be > TSCRANK_NICOLSON (without the H)
Good point, that misspelling has been there forever. > > #define TSEULER "euler" > > #define TSBEULER "beuler" > > #define TSPSEUDO "pseudo" > > #define TSCRANK_NICHOLSON "crank-nicholson" > > #define TSSUNDIALS "sundials" > > #define TSRUNGE_KUTTA "runge-kutta" > > #define TSPYTHON "python" > > #define TSTHETA "theta" > > #define TSGL "gl" > > #define TSSSP "ssp" > > > > someone changed TSRK to TSRUNGE_KUTTA and TSCN to TSCRANK_NICHOLSON but > > then created a TSGL. There was never a TSRK or TSCN, just TS_RUNGE_KUTTA and TS_CRANK_NICHOLSON [sic] that were normalized to TSRUNGE_KUTTA and TSCRANK_NICHOLSON for consistency with name-macros for the other packages. The implementations suffixes were always abbreviated despite the macros having long names. > > What's up with this? How come GL gets an abbreviation but others cannot? > > > > BTW: whoever changed TSRK didn't update the TSCreate_RK() etc with > > TSCreate_RUNGE_KUTTA() or change the manual page for TSRK There used to be a man page for TS_RK even though there was never a TS_RK macro (just TS_RUNGE_KUTTA). My name-normalization patch didn't fix this inconsistency. > > What should we do? I like consistency. I'm happy with all short like TSGL > > and TSRK or all long, but I don't like some short and some long. I prefer that the runtime interface uses short names because these are the names that I'll be typing a lot (I'd rather not have lots of important and frequently changed options under really long prefixes, i.e. -ts_irk_ and -ts_gl_ instead of -ts_implicit_runge_kutta_ and -ts_general_linear_). Consistency implies that the macros should all have short names as well. Shall I abbreviate TSCRANK_NICHOLSON and TSRUNGE_KUTTA? Jed
