Re: [Libmesh-devel] Future DiffContext/FEMContext refactoring

2012-09-20 Thread Roy Stogner
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, David Knezevic wrote: > Well to my mind the matrix/rhs nomenclature is preferable than > jacobian/residual because it's more generic. For example, I sometimes use > FEMContexts to assemble inner-product matrices that are purely used for for > computing norms, so there's no

Re: [Libmesh-devel] Future DiffContext/FEMContext refactoring

2012-09-20 Thread David Knezevic
On 09/20/2012 02:30 PM, Roy Stogner wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, David Knezevic wrote: > >> In terms of renaming, some people using the RB code have been confused >> by the "jacobian" and "residual" nomenclature, which isn't relevant when >> you're assembling linear systems. How about "matrix"

Re: [Libmesh-devel] Future DiffContext/FEMContext refactoring

2012-09-20 Thread Roy Stogner
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Paul T. Bauman wrote: 2.  Put accessors around the raw member variables.  Hopefully then future changes would be less likely to cause API breakage. I'm, say, 30% of the way through this already (from FEAbstract work, etc.); there was a devel thread on this - I

Re: [Libmesh-devel] Future DiffContext/FEMContext refactoring

2012-09-20 Thread Paul T. Bauman
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Roy Stogner wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, David Knezevic wrote: > > > In terms of renaming, some people using the RB code have been confused > > by the "jacobian" and "residual" nomenclature, which isn't relevant when > > you're assembling linear systems. How abo

Re: [Libmesh-devel] Future DiffContext/FEMContext refactoring

2012-09-20 Thread Roy Stogner
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, David Knezevic wrote: > In terms of renaming, some people using the RB code have been confused > by the "jacobian" and "residual" nomenclature, which isn't relevant when > you're assembling linear systems. How about "matrix" and "rhs" or > something instead? Sure it's releva

Re: [Libmesh-devel] Future DiffContext/FEMContext refactoring

2012-09-20 Thread David Knezevic
On 09/20/2012 02:08 PM, Roy Stogner wrote: > Since various FEMSystem changes are on their users' minds lately, it > might be good to mention some more serious changes I'd been > considering for some time after the next official libMesh release: > > 1. Separate the "output" parts of the Context cl

Re: [Libmesh-devel] Future DiffContext/FEMContext refactoring

2012-09-20 Thread Paul T. Bauman
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Roy Stogner wrote: > 1. Separate the "output" parts of the Context classes into a separate > class. Right now we're passing around Context objects which contain > output members (element residual/jacobian, local qoi, etc) along with > input members (element solut

[Libmesh-devel] Future DiffContext/FEMContext refactoring

2012-09-20 Thread Roy Stogner
Since various FEMSystem changes are on their users' minds lately, it might be good to mention some more serious changes I'd been considering for some time after the next official libMesh release: 1. Separate the "output" parts of the Context classes into a separate class. Right now we're passin