On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote:

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:40, Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Right now, DMs wrap up - Domain Topology

- Domain Geometry

...

These are nowhere in the DM interface.

So you think this has nothing to do with - Refinement/coarsening - Local evaluation - Partitioning It is all implied, and in fact only really works completely for Cartesian stuff.

...

- Modeling approximation (like function spaces, projectors)

This is only in the DM interface through coarsening and interpolation.

You also need to know this to piece together local evaluations.

- Modeling equations (including decompositions, variable substitutions)

...

This is only in the DM interface with collective semantics. (For nonlinear ASM, I would be in favor of getting a subdomain DM which would have collective semantics on the subcommunicator instead of putting "local" evaluation into the public interface.)

The equations are there explicitly in all these function pointers it is holding. What are you talking about? Matt

...

and I may have forgotten some stuff. That is a huge amount of crap for one object.

You seem to be confusing the DM interface from a particular way of packing data into an implementation of DM.

-- 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