On 25 June 2010 19:11, Bruno Chareyre <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> but what about simply using rotateAndGetShear, which is already available? >> Splitting this function, as it is partially done, it is useful but in cases >> in which some operations into the contact law are necessary (like damping). >> You said that that function could be used to rotate any vector (in this case >> the input would be a total shear displacement vector instead of shear force) >> and it will return the increment shear displacement. No need to update code. >> It would be only two lines code more (one line to call the function and save >> the returned increment, the other to add the obained increment to the total >> shear displ vector). >> >> > Don't worry Chiara, what you have done will still be functional. What we > discussed today was in relation with memory locality in parallel processing > (right? :) ). After changes, the rotate function would be faster, the > computation of relative velocity would not. Nothing more. > Ah ok I see, thanks bruno! chiara > > Bruno > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: > https://launchpad.net/~yade-users<https://launchpad.net/%7Eyade-users> > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : > https://launchpad.net/~yade-users<https://launchpad.net/%7Eyade-users> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-users Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-users More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
