Toby,
> source/dofs/dof_accessor.cc: In member function 'void
> dealii::DoFCellAccessor<DH>::get_interpolated_dof_values(const
> InputVector&, dealii::Vector<number3>&) const [with InputVector =
> dealii::PETScWrappers::Vector, number = std::complex<double>, DH =
> dealii::DoFHandler<2, 2>]':
> source/dofs/dof_accessor.cc:182: error: no match for 'operator!=' in
> 'tmp2. dealii::Vector<Number>::operator() [with Number =
> std::complex<double>](i) != 0'
> source/dofs/dof_accessor.cc: In member function 'void
> dealii::DoFCellAccessor<DH>::get_interpolated_dof_values(const
> InputVector&, dealii::Vector<number3>&) const [with InputVector =
> dealii::PETScWrappers::Vector, number = std::complex<double>, DH =
> dealii::DoFHandler<2, 3>]':
> [...]
> I figure I need somehow to define the operator!= for
> std::complex<double>, which I feel safe doing...
No, you're on the wrong track. I think this is a design flaw of C++ in that
the following doesn't work
std::complex<double> x;
if (x != 0) ...
C++ doesn't say that you can compare a complex number with a real. I find
that particularly awkward if the real is zero. The way to write this is
using the following patch that I've just check in. It uses that number()
produces a zero of type 'number', whether that's an integer, real, or
complex number.
If you find other places where you get the same problem, you may want to
change the code in a similar way.
Best
Wolfgang
Index: dof_accessor.cc
===================================================================
--- dof_accessor.cc (revision 19993)
+++ dof_accessor.cc (working copy)
@@ -179,7 +179,7 @@
if (restriction_is_additive[i])
interpolated_values(i) += tmp2(i);
else
- if (tmp2(i) != 0)
+ if (tmp2(i) != number())
interpolated_values(i) = tmp2(i);
}
}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: [email protected]
www: http://www.math.tamu.edu/~bangerth/
_______________________________________________
dealii mailing list http://poisson.dealii.org/mailman/listinfo/dealii
