On Friday July 1 2011 04:31:20 Marie E. Rognes wrote: > On 07/01/11 07:50, Johan Hake wrote: > > On Thursday June 30 2011 16:55:46 Marie E. Rognes wrote: > >> On 07/01/11 01:05, Johan Hake wrote: > >>> On Jun 30, 2011, at 12:41, "Marie E. Rognes"<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> On 06/05/11 21:47, Marie E. Rognes wrote: > >>>>> On 06/01/2011 05:45 PM, Johan Hake wrote: > >>>>>> On Wednesday June 1 2011 05:31:35 Anders Logg wrote: > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 01:29:20PM +0200, Marie E. Rognes wrote: > >>>>>>>> I'm for some strange reason loooking at dolfin.fem.Form and > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> dolfin.fem.assemble: > >>>>>>>> The form can be either an FFC form or a precompiled UFC > >>>>>>>> form. If a precompiled or 'pure' FFC form is given, then > >>>>>>>> coefficients and function_spaces have to be provided too. > >>>>>>>> The coefficient functions > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Where and in what cases is the above used? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think this is something Martin and possibly Kent have requested > >>>>>>> before. It's not used anywhere I know. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> They were added so one could use dolfin to assemble a "pure" > >>>>>> ufc::form. This is a nice feature for people who come with their own > >>>>>> form compiler, which is not fully integrated with all the PyDOLFIN > >>>>>> magic we have. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The statement: > >>>>>> "dolfin can assemble any ufc complaint code" > >>>>>> > >>>>>> becomes a little more true with that possibility. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ok, thanks :-) > >>>> > >>>> Late follow-up: so is the logic in dolfin.fem.form regarding given > >>>> function_spaces and coefficients versus those in form_data mainly > >>>> designed around this? > >>> > >>> Not sure I understand your question... > >> > >> Sorry, I was unacceptably unclear. > >> > >> What I meant to ask was this: if assemble did not handle both a "FFC > >> form" and a "precompiled form"(*), but rather just a "FFC form" would it > >> be sufficient to have a dolfin.fem.Form class that only had form, > >> form_compiler_parameters and common_cell as input to __init__? > >> > >> (*) Side note: I'm using the terminology of the docstring of > >> dolfin.fem.assembling here, but I find it a bit confusing, because it > >> refers to a "precompiled or pure FFC form" as the same thing -- should > >> it be "precompiled or pure UFC form"? > > > > Yes, I guess you are right. But that is just wrong anyway. A dolfin.Form > > can be created from a pure ufc form if it is provided with FunctionSpace > > and Coefficient. One cannot just pass a pure ufc form to assemble. > > > > The docstrings need to be updated, and we probably need a unit test for > > this too. In the meantime I think we can remove using pure ufc forms and > > ad it back if someone needs it ;) > > > > Recently we have stripped dolfin of nice but unused functionality, and > > this would be in line with that I guess. > > It makes sense to have the dual functionality, but I think the Form > class would benefit from an update. Something for the summer.
Ok, Martin also had some offline major oppinon about keeping it ;) But I think we need to update the documentation, and add some tests. Johan > -- > Marie _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
