Hi, On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 11:06:26AM -0700, Roland Haas wrote: > This commit (and the following ones) make the tests fail, at least in > subversion (Zelmani is ok since the author *does* provide updated tests, > just not in GRHydr/svn, so I could port over the change).
Regardless of what happens here: the tests should be updated accordingly if this is necessary. > I am personally generally unhappy about commits that require everybody > to change/update their paramater files unless the change is required to > prevent a bug from manifesting. Removing "[0]" from ones parameter file > is not hard, but will break each and every single one of them. One of > the nice things about Cactus has been that (some parts of it) are fairly > stable and developers take care to not introduce changes that require > each user to update their parameter files (unless the user wants/needs > new features). In general, I agree, but sometimes I see that changes are necessary, even without bugs being involved. A code cleanup from time to time is good and might involve some changes - in moderation of course. > I am also not sure I agree with the statement that one cannot have > different Gama or K for different stars. I guess the argument is that there is only _one_ EOS in physics in theory. Of course, what we have here is an approximation, and different stars might use different approximations, resulting in the same functional form of a polytropic EOS, but with different parameters. Something like a piecewise polytropic EOS might be another solution for this problem, but why should I dictate someone else's choice. Also, someone might want to perturb one of the stars but not another by changing its EOS initially. > I would like to revert parts of this patch (keeping the atmosphere > treatment that prevents asymetries in the data setup and seems to be > currently buggy) and restore the possibility to have different K and > Gamma (indep of whether this is physical I don't see a point in removing > this functionality). I agree. Could you provide a patch? Having said that, I would like to use the opportunity to thank Christian for working on this. The TOVSolver is indeed in dire need for cleanup and I very much welcome him working on it. I hope the correct "translation" of "Wo gehobelt wird, fallen Späne" is really "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs", but it is certainly the same spirit. Frank
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users
