On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 1:58 PM, Jed Brown <jed at 59a2.org> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 13:32:08 -0600, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> > wrote: > > I would rather see then hierarchy change. > > Maybe, but many things in the DM interface depend on Mat and Vec. > Where would DMGetInterpolation and DMGetMatrix end up? >
That is definitely a problem. It makes me think we need an R^N part just like we have now, and then a more general part with operators on fiber bundles. > > I think it is natural for the operator (Mat) to depend on the space > > (DM) on which it is discretized. > > Agreed. > > > Just because shortsightedness in the past has confined us to really > > simple spaces (R^N) does not mean we can't change that. > > KSP operates in a finite dimensional linear space, i.e. isometric to > R^n, so at least up to that level, we're not really exploiting the more > general interpretation. > It depends how you see it. KSP can operate just as well on a fiber bundle. Matt > Jed > -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20100101/ed5b376c/attachment.html>
