On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 00:42, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> An alternative is to make clear vec->ops->destroy after calling it. This > seems more robust, so I'm inclined to do it. > I chose this version, let me know if you prefer the more radical variant. http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/petsc-dev/rev/1262149b3e20 > > A more radical alternative is to zero the whole vtable. Are there use > cases where the user wants to change the type, but still expects some of > their own MatOps to not be overwritten when changing the type? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120213/157741b1/attachment.html>
