itaps-parallel New version of iMeshP.h committed

[Devine, Karen D]

OK; I don't care which way we do it.  If we do it your way, I will change
the name of the variable from "offset" to "numNewPerOld" or something like
that, since it is more of a count than an offset.

Let me know which approach you think is more natural.  Then either I'll
change the documentation or you'll change your code.

Thanks for your reply.
Karen



On 11/6/08 7:20 PM, "Onkar Sahni" <osahni at scorec.rpi.edu> wrote:

> Karen,
>
> Thanks for the nice summary.
>
> See my response below (inlined) on two items.
>
>> -  How is the offset array in iMeshP_replaceOnPartBdry used?  I guessed the
>> following; Onkar, let me know if it is correct.  If it is correct, do we
> need offset_size?
>>       offset  (In)  Index into new_entities; old_entities[i]
>>                     is replaced by new_entities[offset[i]] to
>>                     new_entities[offset[i+1]-1].
>
>   As of now FMDB assumes that old_entities[i] has offset[i] "new ents",
> following snippet of code may help:
>
>   int count = 0;
>   for(int i=0; i<old_entities_size; i++) {
>     ...
>     for(int j=0; j<offset[i]; j++) {
>       child[i] = new_entities[count+j];
>       ...
>     }
>     count += offset[i];
>   }
>
>   But I do not see any problem to accomplish the same in the way you
> described it (and as it is in recent iMeshP.h). Ting can provide more
> details.
>
>>
>> -  Add functions to either pull or accumulate tag data as proposed by
> Jason.
>>
>
>    Karen, I see the status of iMeshP_pullTags{Ent} here. Sorry for sending
> you questions separately.
>
> Thanks,
> Onkar
>
>
>
>
>
>