On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 05:03:23PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: > > > Anders Logg wrote: > > The first constructor for FiniteElement seems to be wrong. When we use > > shared pointers, I thought the conclusion was to have two > > constructors: one that takes a reference and one that takes a > > shared_ptr. This is what we do in NewFunction using NoDeleter. > > > > Yes, this is true. > > The reason that the first constructor takes a pointer is that > FiniteElement is still in development. In a number of places in the > code, pointers to a ufc::finite_element are returned. We need to figure > out how we want to deal with this, e.g. should ElementLibrary return a > plain pointer or a shared pointer? > > Garth
I think a shared pointer is safer. And since ElementLibrary is not really part of the user interface, they won't be visible. I'll change this and see if it solves my segmentation fault. -- Anders
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ DOLFIN-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
