I like Lisandro's approach. If the developers can provide scripts that attempt to identify the usage of Vec and replace them with PetscVec, all the better.
A On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Lisandro Dalcin <dalcinl at gmail.com> wrote: > On 28 October 2010 06:45, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >> >> On Oct 27, 2010, at 10:39 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Sean Farley <sean at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >>> ? Matt had a major hissy fit when I proposed this (again) a couple of years >>> ago. >>> >>> What's wrong with a namespace? Isn't this what Matt is proposing the Thrust >>> developers do? >>> >>> "I reported it and they know about it. PETSc takes over VecType, and it >>> would be much easier (maybe) for Thrust to just namespace that thing." >>> >>> Everybody and their mother uses the names Mat, Vec, etc. why can't PETSc >>> namespace them? >>> >>> This is a matter of supporting existing users. Everyone that uses PETSc has >>> Vec and Mat everywhere in >>> their code. If we change that, we will have to have an excellent, easy, and >>> fullproof upgrade path or >>> everyone will hate us and may not even upgrade. >> >> ? Everyone already hates us, so I can live with that. Etags (or ctags with >> Vim) is the way to go, plus it will force everyone to finally learn tags. >> People upgrade because there is a reason in the new release to upgrade, if >> there is no reason to upgrade then why upgrade? >> > > What about properly namespace everything, and also provide a > compatibility header full of #define's , at least for the next couple > of mayor releases? > > > -- > Lisandro Dalcin > --------------- > CIMEC (INTEC/CONICET-UNL) > Predio CONICET-Santa Fe > Colectora RN 168 Km 472, Paraje El Pozo > Tel: +54-342-4511594 (ext 1011) > Tel/Fax: +54-342-4511169 >
