On May 29, 2012, at 1:18 AM, Barry Smith wrote:
Blaise,
How about the attached? My goal is to have the usage be as similar to the
other PetscOptions... calls and too not require the Fortran user to be C
aware that is, they should not have to append null characters or declare
/attachments/20120529/ca98555a/attachment.html
On May 29, 2012, at 3:29 AM, Blaise Bourdin wrote:
On May 29, 2012, at 1:18 AM, Barry Smith wrote:
Blaise,
How about the attached? My goal is to have the usage be as similar to the
other PetscOptions... calls and too not require the Fortran user to be C
aware that is, they
++
/openmp # Microsoft Visual Studio
]:
if self.setCompilers.checkCompilerFlag(flag):
ompflag = flag
break
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120529
...
URL:
http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120529/7c32ca41/attachment.html
Perhaps the 'empty' flag check should be at the begining of the list..
[we do have other places in configure where we fix the order in which
flags are checked - due to similar conflicts between compilers]
Satish
On Tue, 29 May 2012, Jed Brown wrote:
The OpenMP flags do not definitively
# Microsoft Visual Studio
]:
if self.setCompilers.checkCompilerFlag(flag):
ompflag = flag
break
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120529
On May 29, 2012, at 8:00 AM, Barry Smith wrote:
Now I understand what you want. I agree with your goal of making the call
standard and transparent. There is one issue with this approach for a
function like PetscBagRegisterEnum (as far as I understand the C code),
where you don't copy
