Hi, Bruno! I think, it should be HARDLY tested before doing such things. I would test it, but if it is in a separate branch.
Anton 2010/7/14 Václav Šmilauer <[email protected]> > > > After some thinking, I tried what you'll find in r2365. What do you > think? > > What is the reason for merging? I don't see any single benefit in that. > > The only would be if you precomputed summary shear displacement rather > than increment, so that it could be stored from Dem3Dof and ScGeom > together, but you do not do that. > > Do you have a design paper/wiki page etc for ScGeom? I cannot read all > that code now. To my taste, it is all too hairy to serve as a good > basis. > > You put twisting/bending inside ScGeom. That is not economical and just > adding that to Dem3DofGeom without any value added... why?! > > > those classes contains mostly duplicated code btw > No more than necessary. > > The fact of not distinguishing sphere+{sphere,facet,wall} cases makes me > think it cannot work properly, especially when it comes to plasticity > and so on. > > Sorry to be brief. To summarize: I don't understand the reason for that. > > v > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: > https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev<https://launchpad.net/%7Eyade-dev> > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : > https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev<https://launchpad.net/%7Eyade-dev> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
