On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > On Feb 5, 2013, at 7:28 AM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> I see nothing wrong with those tradeoffs, its just beginning to sound >> complicated to me (like the Fortran stuff I can never remember). >> I would say, if you split the libraries, you have to do everything manually, >> and we just error out if you don't. That is easy to remember, >> and I think its harder for a user to have a working code that breaks >> mysteriously when one thing changes, like the comm. >> >> Okay, is this what you have in mind? >> >> 1. XXInitializePackage() grows a comm argument >> 2. PetscFunctionListAdd() loses the comm argument > > Then we would need to remove the support for > [/path/libname[.so.1.0]:]functionname[()] where items in [] denote optional > from PetscFunctionListFind() so no more > > -ksp_type /Users/me/libmyksp.so:MyKSPCreate() > > Instead people would need to load the library in one collective call and then > call the functionlistfind. > > But I guess that is ok, no body uses this anyways.
That would mean we could free up the use of ":[]" for other command line options, right?