On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 15:23, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > You are both wrong on this issue. In 1995 most people thought the > flexibility was totally unneeded and actually harmful for matrices; they > were wrong. In five years you will realize that you were wrong on the issue > for DMs in 2010. Just wait, this is going to be damn powerful.
To elucidate this power, can you explain what benefit *user code* obtains from having a DM while still calling DMGetLocalInfo and rolling loops over the structured local ranges? I fully understand the need for DM to be flexible from the solver perspective, in its uses for multigrid and such. But that's what the interface in _DMOps is for. Do you really envision user code that provides a discretization on an arbitrary DM (same code works with a DA, Sieve-mesh, particle DM)? What might that look like? Jed -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20101018/0a1d0175/attachment.html>
