HasApply is more grammatical. But I like having the naming follow the pattern of
PCXXYY PCXXYYzz PCXXYYww rather than PCzzXXYY, or PCwwXXYY etc. That is as much of the strings should start the same way for related routines. Hence PCApplyRichardsonExists() is near PCApplyRichardson() while PCHasApplyRichardson() is kilometers away. Barry Hence we have KSPMonitor() KSPMonitorSet() KSPMonitorCancel() KSPMonitorSingularValue() KSPMonitorDefault() I realize the KSPMonitorSet() instead of KSPSetMonitor() is non-standard but that doesn't mean it is wrong :-). Essentially when you sort the function names, I'd like the related ones together. On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > Which form should be the preferred one? I'm inclined for the fist... > > PetscErrorCode PCHasApplyTranspose(PC,PetscTruth*) > PetscErrorCode PCApplyRichardsonExists(PC,PetscTruth*) > > >
