I have made the following changes to Petsc-dev that may require you to update your source code: <ul> <li>The int stage used in the PetscLogStageXXX() routines is now a PetscLogStage</li> <li>PetscEvent is now PetscLogEvent</li> <li>PetscLogEventRegister() and PetscLogStageRegister() now return the result in the final argument instead of the first</li> <li>PetscLogClassRegister() is changed to PetscCookieRegister() and returns the cookie in the final argument, not the first</li> </ul> Please let petsc-maint know immediately if you find a problem, and feel free to curse me out for the changes Barry I realized that I was the one who made the initial mistake. I introduced PetscEvent because I did not like the int that make was using for events. I should have, at that time, introduced PetscLogEvent, not PetscEvent. I also didn't fix the stage like I should have. On May 7, 2008, at 10:48 AM, Richard Tran Mills wrote:

Barry,

I like the the suggestion to change PetscLogEvent* to PetscEvent*, but to be consistent with naming then I think we would also need to change PetscLogStage* to PetscStage*, etc.

Just my 0.5 cents.

--Richard

Barry Smith wrote:

...

On May 5, 2008, at 7:39 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:

...

Actually, I would argue that these methods do not actually act on PetscEvent at all (which is just an integer), but rather on a PetscLog. That is why I named them that way. The namage has to be consistent with any normal Joe's thinking about the usage, not based on some implementation issue that only you know about. Names are for users, not for the guru developers. Guru developers could name their variables and functions a1 to a2303 and have no problem maintaining the code. I think the macro names should be changed to PetscEventBegin.... not PetscLogEventBegin.... based on the policy in PETSc that "methods" on "objects" start with the name of the objects: e.g. MatMult(Mat,....) The user shouldn't know or care that PetscEvent is an int and not a PetscEvent or PetscLogEvent object. Barry We could instead change PetscEvent to PetscLogEvent but I think PetscEvent is clear enough without the Log in it.

Matt

On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Barry Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Doesn't seem right.

Barry

-- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener

-- Richard Tran Mills, Ph.D. | E-mail: [email protected] Computational Scientist | Phone: (865) 241-3198 Computational Earth Sciences Group | Fax: (865) 574-0405 Oak Ridge National Laboratory | http://climate.ornl.gov/~rmills