On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Morten Nobel-Jørgensen wrote:
> Dear Matt
>
> Did you (or anyone else) find time to look at our issue?
>
> We are really looking forward to your answer :)
>
Yes, I had a little difficulty understanding what was going on, but now I
think I see. I am
Dear Matt
Did you (or anyone else) find time to look at our issue?
We are really looking forward to your answer :)
Kind regards,
Morten
From: Matthew Knepley [knep...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 3:41 PM
To: Morten Nobel-Jørgensen
Cc:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:40 AM, Morten Nobel-Jørgensen wrote:
> Dear PETSc developers / Matt
>
> Thanks for your suggestions regarding our use of dmplex in a FEM context.
> However, Matt's advise on using the PetscFE is not sufficient for our
> needs (our end goal is a topology
Dear PETSc developers / Matt
Thanks for your suggestions regarding our use of dmplex in a FEM context.
However, Matt's advise on using the PetscFE is not sufficient for our needs
(our end goal is a topology optimization framework - not just FEM) and we must
honestly admit that we do not see