Good point... So we should rename
PetscErrorCode PCHasApplyTranspose(PC,PetscTruth*) to PetscErrorCode PCApplyTransposeExists(PC,PetscTruth*) ??? On 10/9/07, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > 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*) > > > > > > > > -- Lisandro Dalc?n --------------- Centro Internacional de M?todos Computacionales en Ingenier?a (CIMEC) Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnol?gico para la Industria Qu?mica (INTEC) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient?ficas y T?cnicas (CONICET) PTLC - G?emes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594
