On Apr 7, 2013, at 4:16 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote:

Barry Smith <[email protected]> writes:

...

That was my rationalization for ugly code; until a better solution appeared and I no longer needed the rationalization :-)

Okay, are we removing _all_ those casts, or only for a few highly-used PetscObject functions? PetscObjectComm() is one we changed recently.

Seems inconsistent to only handle the cast automatically for some. We should do it all or nothing. That is be C++ish and let the user always pass a subclass where the class is expected or be C ish and always require the cast.

Note that absorbing the cast into the macro is backward-compatible in that code with an explicit cast continues to work without a warning.

Ok, then we shouldn't make this change, you know I hate changes that are backward compatible :-)