[Dolfin] Fwd: [Branch ~dolfin-core/dolfin/trunk] Rev 6467: Change return value of IntervalCell::facet_area() 0.0 -- 1.0.

Should this change have gone into the 1.0 branch rather than trunk? Garth -- Forwarded message -- From: nore...@launchpad.net Date: 24 November 2011 12:43 Subject: [Branch ~dolfin-core/dolfin/trunk] Rev 6467: Change return value of IntervalCell::facet_area() 0.0 -- 1.0. To:

[Dolfin] globalparameters.py.in?

Is there are reason why site-packages/dolfin/common/globalparameters.py.in end with '.in'? Garth ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help :

Re: [Dolfin] globalparameters.py.in?

B1;2802;0cOn Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 03:58:03PM +, Garth N. Wells wrote: Is there are reason why site-packages/dolfin/common/globalparameters.py.in end with '.in'? Yes, because it needs to be able to spit out the value of @SWIG_BINARY@ so the .py file gets generated from the .i file when

Re: [Dolfin] globalparameters.py.in?

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Garth N. Wells gn...@cam.ac.uk wrote: Is there are reason why  site-packages/dolfin/common/globalparameters.py.in end with '.in'? Yes, we use CMake to set the swig_binary parameter. Johannes ___ Mailing list:

Re: [Dolfin] default form compiler options

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 05:49:05PM +, Garth N. Wells wrote: I think that it used to be possible to set default form compiler options easily, e.g. parameters[form_compiler][quadrature_degree] = 1 parameters[form_compiler][optimize] = True parameters[form_compiler][eliminate_zeros] =

[Dolfin] buildbot failure in dolfin-trunk on dolfin-linux64-exp

The Buildbot has detected a new failure of dolfin-linux64-exp on dolfin-trunk. Full details are available at: http://fenicsproject.org:8090/builders/dolfin-linux64-exp/builds/21 Buildbot URL: http://fenicsproject.org:8090/ Buildslave for this Build: linux64-exp Build Reason: Build Source