Le 12/02/2013 11:55, Volker Braun a écrit :
I know very well the guys in University Paris VI which develop FreeFem; FreeFem is widely used in the community of PDEs in France and even, a lot of money has been put in the development.+1 for having a FEM implementation.I've seen some of the codes in numerical GR (Cactus) and they are definitely not "generic FEM" implementations that one could apply to a wide range of problems ;-) On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:12:42 AM UTC, tdumont wrote: I like FreeFem++ http://www.freefem.org/ff++/index.htm <http://www.freefem.org/ff++/index.htm> because it does not hide mathematics! But integrating it in Sage would certainly be a hard task, I think. Any opinion about this? It already has a shared library interface, thats a great plus. I think it would be easy to tie it in with a simple ipc messaging system much like the Mathematica mathlink demo I posted about a month ago. What we primarily need to figure out is how to present the functionality to the user. I guess thats basically three pieces of information: mesh construction/refinement, the PDE itself, and boundary data. It would be nice if you could just throw a symbolic PDE in there and get out something reasonable...
I start a discusssion with them. Yours t. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
<<attachment: tdumont.vcf>>
