How come it is PetscEvent but all the routines that act on it are PetscLogEventXXXX()?

[Barry Smith]

On May 5, 2008, at 7:39 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:

> Actually, I would argue that these methods do not actually act on  
> PetscEvent
> at all (which is just an integer), but rather on a PetscLog. That is  
> why I named
> them that way.

    The namage has to be consistent with any normal Joe's thinking  
about the usage,
not based on some implementation issue that only you know about. Names  
are for
users, not for the guru developers. Guru developers could name their  
variables and
functions a1 to a2303 and have no problem maintaining the code.

   I think the macro names should be changed to PetscEventBegin.... not
PetscLogEventBegin.... based on the policy in PETSc that "methods" on  
"objects"
start with the name of the objects: e.g. MatMult(Mat,....) The user  
shouldn't know
or care that PetscEvent is an int and not a PetscEvent or  
PetscLogEvent object.

    Barry

We could instead change PetscEvent to PetscLogEvent but I think  
PetscEvent
is clear enough without the Log in it.


>
>
>  Matt
>
> On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov>  
> wrote:
>>
>>   Doesn't seem right.
>>
>>   Barry
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> 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
>