|Subject:||Re: [Getfem-users] Bug related to element faces referred both as short_type and size_type|
|Date:||Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:03:30 +0200|
You are right of course. This have to be standardized.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Konstantinos Poulios" <address@hidden>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 7:56:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Getfem-users] Bug related to element faces referred both as short_type and size_type
After looking into that, it is a bit worse than I thought. In different places of getfem, short_type, size_type and even dim_type are used for referring to element faces.
Now, I have a patch tidying this up, which makes all occurrences of faces of type short_type but it is quite extensive and it obviously changes the getfem API quite a bit. Maybe it is a good opportunity now that 4.3 release is out to commit these changes and fix any issues that may arise until the release of version 5.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Konstantinos Poulios < address@hidden > wrote:
I have just noticed that in fem_interpolation_context, element faces are referred as size_type, while in mesh_region_visitor, short_type is used.
One consequence of this is that the fem_interpolation_context::is_on_face() method seems not to work at the moment.
I have the impression that short_type is used in most cases for referring to element faces in getfem. Should I fix fem_interpolation_context making it to use the short_type instead?
Getfem-users mailing list
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|