On Sep 9, 2013, at 4:32 PM, Jed Brown <jedbr...@mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Barry Smith <bsm...@mcs.anl.gov> writes: >> I don't care if PCMGSetResidual stays around for now but I do not >> think we should "point to it" as a standard way for people to do >> things; I think we should improve how the two slots are used with >> PCMG, it really has never been thought about at all and whenever >> possible I think using the two slots appropriately is better than >> PCMGSetResidual and will solve most of the "use" cases. > > Fine, I was just not eager to _delete_ PCMGSetResidual until we had > established a complete replacement, and even then, it might be enough to > leave it as "advanced" and suggest the preferred alternative in the man > page. It just doesn't seem expensive to support and I don't think it > causes people to tangle themselves up in bad design.
It doesn't have its own object which is kind of limiting.