We could make a fast key-based generic compose. On Nov 30, 2012 11:36 AM, "Barry Smith" <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 2012, at 11:30 AM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 30, 2012 11:17 AM, "Barry Smith" <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I would like to add to the _p_DM struct > > > > > > PetscObject dmksp, dmsnes, dmts. > > > > > > The current model that uses PetscObjectCompose() is a mis-use of > PetscObjectCompose(), why? > > > > > > The PetscObjectQuery() is always used for every function evaluation in > every time step, every Newton step, ? > > > > > > 1) this is a performance problem with small size ODEs for example > > > > > > 2) PetscObjectQuery is suppose to be for exceptional things that occur > seldomly, not ones that occur inside the main computational routes. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please send any technical (not philosophical) reasons why making > this change is a bad idea and will haunt us later. > > > > There is an extensibility problem that Jed has already noted. > > That is only a philosophical objection :-) If one wishes to add a > DMGetDMTAOSomething() they can implement it with the PetscObjectCompose() > model so things are still extensible. > > > > Barry > > > > > Matt > > > > > Barry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20121130/93519b9d/attachment.html>
