On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Roy Stogner wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>
>> In the course of tracking down the dynamic_cast problem, I updated my
>> libMesh version from revision 41xx (don't remember) to revision 4237.
>> It turned out that there is again an xdr file format incompatibil
On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> In the course of tracking down the dynamic_cast problem, I updated my
> libMesh version from revision 41xx (don't remember) to revision 4237.
> It turned out that there is again an xdr file format incompatibility.
> I tracked it down, and it is from 4223
Dear libMesh team,
In the course of tracking down the dynamic_cast problem, I updated my
libMesh version from revision 41xx (don't remember) to revision 4237.
It turned out that there is again an xdr file format incompatibility.
I tracked it down, and it is from 4223 to 4224. All my computatio
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>
>> I thought that the meshes would be enought because you could read them in
>> with and without your fix and see that the get read differently.
>
> I must have misunderstood your test. What I'd proposed was:
> 1
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> I thought that the meshes would be enought because you could read them in
> with and without your fix and see that the get read differently.
I must have misunderstood your test. What I'd proposed was:
1. take a mesh and solution written with old libHil
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
>
> Anyway, I now put the systems files up for download (replace "mesh"
> with "systms" in the filenames).
"systms" or "systems" as you like (I made symlinks now...).
You should know that altough the grids are mean
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>
>> I hope that I did everything correct. One never knows what I forget to
>> do...
>
> Possibly nothing - just because I'm seeing good results on a couple
> test restart files doesn't mean that the fix is correct
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> I hope that I did everything correct. One never knows what I forget to do...
Possibly nothing - just because I'm seeing good results on a couple
test restart files doesn't mean that the fix is correct in all cases.
I just downloaded the old and new mes
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
>>
>>> Indefinitely, I'm afraid. I can replicate the problem easily enough,
>>> but I haven't found the right fix yet, and haven't had as much time to
>>> work on it as I'
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
Indefinitely, I'm afraid. I can replicate the problem easily enough,
but I haven't found the right fix yet, and haven't had as much time to
work on it as I'd like.
I see. Let me know if there is any issue in tha
Dear Roy,
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
>
>> I don't want to prod, but just to be curious, is there any information
>> about how long your week is going to last? (-:
>
> Indefinitely, I'm afraid. I can replicate the problem easily enough,
> bu
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> On Wed, 19 May 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
>
>> But we should at least get the new code properly reading old files.
>> Would you mind helping out with that, since you've already got a
>> failure case prepared? I'll try to get things working on a small test
>
Dear Roy,
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
> But we should at least get the new code properly reading old files.
> Would you mind helping out with that, since you've already got a
> failure case prepared? I'll try to get things working on a small test
> case myself this week, and I'll let
Dear Roy,
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Roy Stogner wrote:
> But we should at least get the new code properly reading old files.
> Would you mind helping out with that, since you've already got a
> failure case prepared? I'll try to get things working on a small test
> case myself this week, and I'll let
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Tim Kroeger wrote:
> When I now read in results that have been written with the old
> version, I get completely wrong results. If I re-run the simulation
> and then read in the result, everything is fine again. Hence, I
> assume that there has been a format change in the xd
Dear libMesh team,
In my application, I write the results to two files using:
mesh.write("mesh.xdr");
systems.write("systems.xdr",libMeshEnums::WRITE,EquationSystems::WRITE_DATA|EquationSystems::WRITE_ADDITIONAL_DATA);
Then, in a different program, I read in these results using:
Mesh mesh(3);
m
16 matches
Mail list logo
