On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 03:14:42PM -0700, Johan Hake wrote: > On Thursday October 20 2011 13:46:03 Marie E. Rognes wrote: > > On 10/20/2011 10:37 PM, Anders Logg wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 09:56:05PM +0200, Anders Logg wrote: > > >> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:51:31PM -0700, Johan Hake wrote: > > >>> On Wednesday October 19 2011 12:29:51 Anders Logg wrote: > > >>>> What should we name functions that print stuff? We now have > > >>>> > > >>>> list_linear_solver_methods() > > >>>> list_lu_solver_methods() > > >>>> list_krylov_solver_methods() > > >>>> list_krylov_solver_preconditioners() > > >>>> list_timings() > > >>> > > >>> I think we should add > > >>> > > >>> list_linear_algebra_backends() > > >> > > >> Good suggestion. > > >> > > >>>> Is list_foo good? Other options are > > >>>> > > >>>> print_foo() # Natural, but perhaps a bit vulgar? > > >>>> info_foo() # Goes with the info() function > > >>>> display_foo() # I don't like this one > > >>> > > >>> Not a big deal, but I like either one of the later rather than > > >>> list_foo. > > >>> > > >>> What do you have against display or disp? > > >> > > >> It sounds more like graphics than text. And we just to have foo.disp() > > >> in DOLFIN before we had info(foo), so that might also be a reason why > > >> I don't like it. > > >> > > >>> Is the connection to info in info_foo confusing rather than clarifying? > > >>> If we go with this one, we should probably use the log system (info) > > >>> to actualy display the info. > > >> > > >> We do use the log system (dolfin::cout). > > >> > > >> More comments? Let's settle on something "everyone" likes so we can > > >> get it into the book and 1.0. > > > > > > More input on this? If not, list_foo is already in the DOLFIN chapter > > > and unit tests. > > Just go with list_foo then.
ok! -- Anders _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
