On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
> The phrase "may as well" is very slippery. Python arrays are just [x, y, > z], whereas JSON needs a library. > However, the format is is now way crucial to the scheme. I want to get the > workflow up an running with > the simplest format. We will inevitably tweak it was we add tons of crap > on top if it works. > The syntax for plain arrays is identical. I was suggesting JSON to manage recursive data structures (nested solvers, perhaps monitoring different things). So it becomes a dict of arrays or a dict of dicts of arrays. Also, we could spit out -snes_view in machine-readable form, we could have nicer diagnostics on the GUI side. It is because of these extensions that I think it's worth starting with something that will extend gracefully rather than a hack that is only intended for arrays of numbers. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130210/cd78827d/attachment.html>
