I have added PetscObjectComm() and used it 2531 times in the PETSc source.
I have not yet added any code to deal with MPI_COMM_NULL yet.
Barry
On Feb 12, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Matthew Knepley <petsc-maint at mcs.anl.gov>
> wrote:
> > I also think including the impl is a bad option. I think the default should
> > be an Object (yes,
> > I am advocating changing the interface again), and SETERRC() would take a
> > comm.
>
> I had suggested MPI_Comm PetscObjectGetComm(PetscObject) that can be
> called inside the SETERRQ() thing, is not an issue for performance since it
> is called only for error processing. For some reason it was silently rejected.
>
> I thought it violated the Style Guide :)
>
> Should we name this non-error-checking thing PetscObjectComm() (returning
> MPI_COMM_NULL if passed invalid input) and leave the error-checking
> PetscObjectGetComm() for existing users and any time it's convenient to use?
> Or is it too confusing to have two ways to access the comm?
