PetscInitializeBegin() PetscSetX() PetscSetY() …. PetscInitializeEnd()
where PetscInitialize() does the default of all of these things? Barry On Nov 10, 2013, at 4:28 PM, Karl Rupp <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey, > > >> Both a) and b) don't seem attractive to me, so I'd rather *not* >>> initialize everything in there. >> >> Agreed, I'm all for reducing how much is done in PetscInitialize. It >> could be as bare-bones as taking command line arguments, malloc, and the >> profiling clock. But I think it would be difficult to remove it >> entirely without cluttering user code with additional calls. Ideally it >> could be simplified to a short sequence of function calls that the >> advanced user could call themselves. > > Yep, that's how I envision this as well. As long as we don't have good > (non-academic) reasons for removing PetscInitialize, I'd prefer to keep it > around in order to have a well-defined entry-point for our users. > > Best regards, > Karli > >
