On 18 October 2010 10:49, Jed Brown <jed at 59a2.org> wrote: > For the sake of argument, why not get rid of all static types that inherit > from PetscObject? ?Then everything in Mat, KSP, SNES, etc could use > QueryFunction for dispatch. > My claim is that the relationship between DM and it's subtypes, from the > user's perspective, is much more like the relationship between PetscObject > and it's subtypes (e.g. Mat). ?There are some functions that operate on > generic PetscObjects (e.g. PetscOList*, View, SetFromOptions), but most uses > of Mat need to know statically that it is a Mat (not a KSP or some other > PetscObject) in the same way that most uses (by users) of DA need to know > statically that it is a DA and not some other DM. > This is why I prefer the more static inheritance model from PetscObject -> > Mat for this purpose. ?What flexibility is being gained by using this new > dynamic model? > Jed
I totally agree. -- 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
