On Nov 29, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> Lisandro just pointed out that it does not return a range, which is indeed
> confusing. Two options:
>
> 1. Keep the current interface but find a better name. Low impact on users.
>
> 2. Keep the name, and make it return offset arrays of length m+1,n+1,p+1 (the
> closest analogy to Vec and mat OwnershipRanges). Higher impact on users,
> would require revisiting a decent amount of code in DA, but probably not in a
> deep way.
Since there is not something like VecGetOwnershipSizes() but only
VecGetOwnershipRanges() I think keeping the name but changing the meaning is
the correct approach. Changing the name means introducing a new concept that
doesn't exist elsewhere and boy do I hate having tons of concepts in PETSc.
Plus few sane people would use this routine so changing its meaning won't
effect many end users.
Barry
>
> Jed
