On 26 November 2010 15:55, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > On Nov 26, 2010, at 12:32 PM, Jed Brown wrote: > >> This seems to be equal to either 0 or -1 for every type in PETSc. ?The >> comments for PetscHeaderCreate suggest that it no longer has any meaning, >> but we still have PetscCheckSameTypeAndComm. ?What was the intent of this >> field? > > > ? ? Originally types were ints; that field has hung around ever since then. > It is not used and should be removed. Then replaced with something better. > >> ?Is it to have a faster way than strcmp to check whether two implementations >> match? > > ? ?Not currently. We have PetscClassId and class_name. We could also have > PetscTypeId and type_name in the PetscObject struct. When > XXXRegisterDynamic() is called it could create a new PetscTypeId for the > string name. When an XXXSetType() is called it could determine the Id based > on the string name of the type set in (how to do this efficiently, would it > search through a list of strings?) I think we should think about this a bit > before doing it. >
I would like to have PetscTypeId for use in petsc4py, specially after Barry's DM/DA changes. -- 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
