> sorry but I cannot get why it shouldn't. So if I do that (as it is yet made > by the Ip2_FrictMat_FrictMat_Basic) which would be the consequence? Generally > speaking, which is this design issue you mentioned?
You have to suppose some exact type of InteractionGeometry in the Ip2 functor, but you don't know anything about it (Ip2 only guarantees you get certain InteractionPhysics types, via the dispatch mechanism). That means, unless you use Ig2 functor producing the desired type, the code will break (crash or whatever). The right behavior would be either to accept any type (what we have now, at least in principle), or really enforce InteractionGeometry type of the interation passed to that particuler Ip2 functor. v _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
