On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> Regardless of exactly how this shakes out I think you both have to agree > that PetscSection is a bit of an oddball and it should be more "integrated" > with the "IS stuff" in that we have a single source code location > (directory) and set of concepts related to indexing things. And don't have > some in the Vec directory. > So, for now, I won't change names or functionality but would like > permission to move source around. Who knows, maybe in the end the is > directory will get a more suitable name. > That's fine with me, but note that vsection.c depends on Vec, but IS does not depend on Vec. vsection.c depends on Vec so it can't simply be moved to src/vec/is. > > Barry > > As you know I really really like having names that convey connections left > to right, KSPGMRES, PC_ILU etc. I think this helps make the learning and > understanding curve lower. Now people see IS and PetscSection and they are > two completely unrelated things to their eyes but in fact they are not > unrelated and I would like to convey that somehow in the future. > > BTW: I consider it a terrible tragedy that in (for example C++ and Java) > one can define a subclass of a class and just use a completely arbitrary > ASCII name for the subclass completely unrelated to the class it is derived > from, talk about losing information. > Just be glad not too many projects chose the German way, using a three-term recurrence to compute the designation order, and always withholding the verb until the end. ;-) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130213/15fe61db/attachment.html>
