[petsc-dev] TSSetArtificialForcingFunction()

[Jed Brown]

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:25 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> Yes, that is what I was thinking. They would provide this just like any
> other terms but by putting it in a different place it doesn't "interfer"
> with the problem they "want to solve" so they may be more likely to do it.
> If we tell people just put it into your RHSFunction they may not do it or
> may FIU by not putting in the terms for the problem they "want to solve".
> Basically turning the testing into something orthogonal to the usual stuff
> they provide ….


If we want something like this, I'd be more interested in providing
TSRegisterRHSFunction and TSRegisterMonitor or some such so that they don't
have to roll the PetscFunctionList stuff themselves.

Otherwise we're just declaring a second special-purpose function name for a
generic idea that will normally have several implementations. But note that
each of these "solutions" may well have its own tunable parameters, at
which point it grows a SetFromOptions and a View method, but having all
these functions to implement loses the convenience of the original idea.
Maybe people should just be taught to use PetscFunctionList.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130201/bc7050cb/attachment.html>