On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Matthew Knepley wrote:

On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Barry Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Fortran90 has namespaces??????

Not in the way I was thinking. Damn F90. Anyway, it looks like you can selectively use interface modules, so we might be able to get away with redundant names by just not using them together.

I jsut really hate the idea of putting "PETSc" in front of every word in the package. It is really the ugliest thing I can imagine and will make programming that much more of a slog.

We already do this for lot of things. [this wasn't the case when we started] - all petsc libraries now have a 'petsc' prefix. - all configure flags have petsc prefix [this wasn't the case - when we started]. - all petsc datatypes now have petsc prefix. And wrt namesapcing, the correct thing to do is expand the namespace to languages without it. [not ingore it]. For eg: All MPI rutines have 'MPI' name space. The way its implemented is: MPI::Comm_rank() - c++ MPI_Comm_rank() - C,F77 [but just because c doesn't have namespace -they didn't decide to use just Comm_rank() for c] The biggest issue is: PETSc tries to use full names for functions, and we usually exceed 32char limit on some machines. And additional 5 chars to each function name might tip us over this limit. Satish