> The order you call the register routines should not matter. Only the order > they are listed in the struct matters. Did you get something breaking if you > didn't call the register routines in order?
Yes, originally I fixed the problem just by changing the order of the register calls. Bizarrely, I can't recreate the error now, regardless of the order of the entries in the struct or the order of the register calls. This goes for my test-code as well as src/sys/examples/tutorials/ex5.c I have pulled and recompiled petsc-dev since submitting that issue to petsc-maint Rich > > I know the ascii view prints "incorrect" values. This is a universal > problem with working with quad precision. C provides no portable (or even > nonportable) way of handling format statements for different precisions > builds. > > Unless Jed figures out a way to do it the current model is that with quad > they are printed wrong and you need to manage their display yourself. > > Barry > > I try to handle the problem with %G format that we manually map to different > "standard" C formats, but quad doesn't have a "standard" C format that works. > > > On Mar 24, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Richard Katz wrote: > >> Attached is a diff file updating >> src/sys/examples/tutorials/ex5.c >> which is an example of PetscBag use. >> >> I've changed the order of the parameter registrations to put the Real values >> first, as required with quad precision. >> >> If you run the new version with quad precision, you'll see that when the bag >> is viewed to stdout, the Real numerical values are incorrectly displayed. >> >> Cheers >> Rich >> >> >> <ex5.diff> > ________________________________ Richard Foa Katz Dept Earth Sciences, Univ Oxford http://www.earth.ox.ac.uk/katz
