Or your can #define ! ... just a joke (a not a really good one)... On 5/6/08, Barry Smith <[email protected]> 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

-- Lisandro Dalc�n --------------- Centro Internacional de M�todos Computacionales en Ingenier�a (CIMEC) Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnol�gico para la Industria Qu�mica (INTEC) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient�ficas y T�cnicas (CONICET) PTLC - G�emes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594