On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Mike Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 6:25 AM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Yes, I did. This is the code developed by people at Simula. It works > > > nice, but it's quite difficult to install. I generally prefer smaller > > > tools, if I can get the job done. > > > > > > Ondrej > > > > Other than size and build issues, are the two projects equivalent > > feature / speed-wise? > > To my purposes, sfepy is better than fenics, because sfepy is in > python (and can do all I need). As to speed, that's about the same, > because the mainloop of sfepy for the assembly is in pure C, without > any python callbacks. Also because it's smaller, I find it simpler to > use. But Fenics definitely is also good and have it's users.
Feature-wise, is Fenics better than sfepy? You did seem to indicate sfepy is smaller. Is it because Fenics does more? Also, isn't Fenics also in C+Python? > > Ondrej > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
