On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:38 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > There are two significant changes I'd like to see before the > next PETSc release: > > 1) remove the overly complicated (from a user perspective) matrix > subclassing for the various external > matrix solver packages and replace with MatSolverSetType() - > mat_solver_type <type> that simply > flips the various factorization/solver functions with those > requested and
This seems not too hard. Just a layer on top to run the code a user must run now. > 2) properly name-space PETSc by putting a Petsc in front of all PETSc > objects, function names etc > (this will require changing a few names also to keep them below > the 32 character limit). This will > be very painful change for some users who are not comfortable > ever changing code, hence I hesitate > to do it, but it is the right thing to do and should have been > done originally. I guess I still do not see the need for this. NIMROD is a not a sufficient driver in my mind. If we really want namespaces, use a real language that has namespaces. There are plenty. If we are still using C, I say we stick with the old division. The imposition of this much pain on the overwhelming majority of users seems unjustified. Namespaces issues can be trivially fixed in say C++, which we should do. Matt > Maybe we can do a release in around a couple of months, it would > be 2.4 > > Barry > > > -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener