On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, John Peterson wrote:
> I was thinking of sending this to the list, but I wanted to be sure I
> wasn't being stupid first...
Copying to libmesh-devel. If we start playing by "don't send to the
list unless we're certain it's not stupid" rules, nobody's going to
hear from me u
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Roy Stogner wrote:
>
> Not sure what the best solution is. Add a sanity check by calculating
> xyz for the results of the inverse_map and making sure the distance
> from the original point is under tol*h_max? Seems unnecessarily
> expensive in 90% of case, but I
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:14 PM, John Peterson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Roy Stogner
> wrote:
>>
>> Not sure what the best solution is. Add a sanity check by calculating
>> xyz for the results of the inverse_map and making sure the distance
>> from the original point is under t
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, John Peterson wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:14 PM, John Peterson wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Roy Stogner wrote:
Not sure what the best solution is. Add a sanity check by calculating
xyz for the results of the inverse_map and making sure the distance
f
