why not a single PETSc library

[Matthew Knepley]

I would ask: why is anything ever split up? Why not just munge everything in
the
entire Linux distribution into one big fat library?

  Matt

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Jed Brown <jed at 59a2.org> wrote:

> Barry Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 9, 2009, at 4:37 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> >
> >> I think its legitimate to only want some of our crap.
> >
> >    You only get what you use; if you only use KSP then only the KSP and
> > below stuff will be pulled into your program, so what is the problem?
>
> With shared libs, you always get the whole thing.  Of course, the unused
> part may only be mapped into virtual memory (thus never physically
> present).  I suspect it's fairly rare to use less than Mat or KSP at
> which point the presence of SNES/TS/DM is minimal overhead.  A single
> lib is certainly easier to find with configure scripts.
>
> Jed
>
>


-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20090609/0aac92a8/attachment.html>