Hi, A very late response and a revival of what I think is an important topic...
First of all, thanks to the dev's for being willing to produce and update the tuts. I don't know where I'd be if I didn't have access to them. I think that its a great idea to update the tutorials, but at the same time I feel that there's a lot of important information, tricks and understanding in doing fundamental processes one's self. That way, customisation that canhnot be done inside of the provided helper classes will not be a dificult task. Perhaps its not all that critical to most of deal.II users, but I think that without knowledge of- and familiarity with the lower-level operations it might be difficult to develop a program that goes beyond the norm of people use the software for. I suggest that one puts both options side-by-side, sort of like what's done with the "Parallel computing with multiple processors" module, and allow the reader to see get an idea of what's going on at a lower level. Essentially, a snapshot of the older method and the updated methodology that has replaced it. That way its still clear to see what capabilities deal.II has, both fundamental and more abstract and user-friendly, as well as how one uses them. Regards, Jean-Paul On 6 February 2010 09:50, Markus Bürg <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Wolfgang, > > I think it would be great, if the outdated tutorials would be updated. In > my experience a lot of people only read the tutorials directly related to > the (kind of) problem they want to solve. Thus they never get in contact > with the new techniques "hidden" in the later tutorials. > > Best Regards, > Markus > > > > Wolfgang Bangerth schrieb: > > All, >> for a few years something has been bugging me: Some of the tutorial >> programs we have aren't quite up to date any more with regard to the tools >> in the library we use. For example, - step-16 shows multigrid for uniformly >> refined grids, but we can now do >> multigrid on adaptively refined grids as well >> - step-12 shows DG methods, but doing a lot of things by hand that we >> can now do better and more comfortable with Guido's MeshWorker >> framework >> - step-9 shows assembling linear systems with explicit threads when we can >> do things in a much simpler and more scalable way using the WorkStream >> framework >> >> Traditionally, what we then did is to just write a new tutorial, or show >> these techniques en passant in another program (the new step-38, which >> solves the exact same problem as step-12 using MeshWorker; step-32 which >> among many other things happens to use WorkStream). The reasoning was >> somehow that we want to be compatible and not force people to re-read >> tutorials they've already read. >> >> But I'm getting more and more convinced that our current strategy is >> silly. In particular, it makes people who are new to the library read >> tutorial programs that just aren't up to date any more. A proliferation of >> tutorial programs (e.g. step-12 vs step-38) also doesn't help anybody. Does >> anyone have opinions either way how we should address this problem? >> >> Best >> W. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Wolfgang Bangerth email: [email protected] >> www: >> http://www.math.tamu.edu/~bangerth/<http://www.math.tamu.edu/%7Ebangerth/> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dealii mailing list http://poisson.dealii.org/mailman/listinfo/dealii >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > dealii mailing list http://poisson.dealii.org/mailman/listinfo/dealii >
_______________________________________________ dealii mailing list http://poisson.dealii.org/mailman/listinfo/dealii
