Barry Smith <bsm...@mcs.anl.gov> writes: >> On Oct 17, 2017, at 9:47 AM, Jed Brown <j...@jedbrown.org> wrote: >> >> Lawrence Mitchell <wen...@gmail.com> writes: >> >> >> When I suggested as a young child that DM be essentially just a function >> space and create a new object for resolution-independent specification >> of a problem (residual and Jacobian functions and related components), >> Barry wanted it to be part of DM to avoid having a new object. So it's >> part of DM -- make a new DM if you're solving a different problem. > > Of course, everything in PETSc is subject to refactorization and it > may be time to do this refactorization; especially if it can > dramatically decrease the ugly subtle complexities of the TSDM, > SNESDM .... management. One more public object per solver level is > probably better than the complexity we have now I do admit.
I'm not opposed to refactoring (though it would take me significant time without distractions), but this sort of change would have a lot more consequences now because we have lots of code depending on it. Is there a functional reason to refactor now?
