On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Geoffrey Irving <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It looks like when ex12 clones the DM, it reuses the mesh data >> structure but copies the coordinate vector. Is there a reason it >> can't reuse that storage? Given that the PetscFEM routines accept the >> same position array for dependent and auxiliary fields, does it even >> make sense to have distinct coordinate arrays? > > > Yes, this is lazy. It could be replaced by > > DMGetCoordinateSection(dm, &s) > DMGetCoordinatesLocal(dm, &c) > DMSetCoordinateSection(dmAux, s) > DMSetCoordinatesLocal(dmAux, c)
Does it matter that dm's section knows about boundary conditions, and dmAux's currently doesn't? This change would mean that both sections know about boundary conditions. Should I make this change to ex12 and remove the SetupMaterialSection function entirely, or should I only use it in my own code? Thanks, Geoffrey
