Thanks. I see your point about "intersected". I think "projected_target_region" is a good name.
If you do this change I can squash and merge your commits. Best regards Kostas On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 2:06 PM Andriy Andreykiv <andriy.andrey...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Konstantinos, > > Replaced almost all the auto's. Regarding intersected_target_region, that > could be, but for me the word intersected would be appropriate if it was > interpolated_fem where the regions intersect. > Physically it feels like touch, but I agree that we have touch() in > context_dependencies which might be confusing. > Here I feel a need for the concept of projection. I personally need a > name that condenses the sentence "region that contains part of the target > where the source is projected on". Can we say > projected_target_region? We can also go with supported_target_region()? > > Let me know what you think, > Andriy > > > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 at 12:38, Konstantinos Poulios <logar...@googlemail.com> > wrote: > >> should we also briefly discuss the name of the function? In mathematical >> terms I would call it >> >> support_region >> >> But a more popularized name might be easier to understand in general. >> However, I do not like "touched" because "touch" is typically used in >> programming for denoting change in state, so your current name I understand >> it as a region that has state A and changes to state B. We could instead >> call it >> >> intersected_target_region >> >> or something similar. Other ideas? >> >> In general I think we should spend some effort in good names because once >> a name is in the API it is more difficult to remove. >> >> Best regards >> Kostas >> >> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 12:31 PM Konstantinos Poulios < >> logar...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Andriy, >>> >>> Thanks, I see how it can be useful. Could I ask you to reduce the use of >>> auto for this commit? For example it does not make much sense to use auto >>> for bool. In general my preference for the GetFEM codebase is to use auto >>> only if some type is particularly long and makes the code significantly >>> less readable. Otherwise the type of the variables is useful information >>> for people that will read and try to understand the code later. >>> >>> There is also a typo in a comment. It should be "Gauss". >>> >>> Best regards >>> Kostas >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 11:32 AM Andriy Andreykiv < >>> andriy.andrey...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Yves and Konstantinus, >>>> >>>> Kind request to review and merge touched_region_for_projected_fem >>>> branch. >>>> It introduces a method for projected_fem that extracts a region from >>>> the target that is actually touched by the source. >>>> I use this region to integrate my mortar terms on. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Andriy >>>> >>>> >>>>
