[petsc-dev] ML interface
jed at 59A2.org
Tue Apr 20 12:56:49 CDT 2010
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 12:45:07 -0500, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> If ML is being replaced why waste any time on it?
Agreed, but I don't know how long it's going to take to have something
usable. The Sandia folks are all still using ML because the rewrite
isn't usable yet.
> Why not become a beta tester of the rewrite and make an interface for
> that? (You would possibly be able to influence bad decisions they are
> going to make).
Agreed, it would help if Sandia had public repositories.
> PETSc already defined CCXX even when using the C compiler. You
> could introduce SOURCECXX in the makefiles and possibly make mixing in
> some C++ code relatively easily.
> BUT why not just build PETSc with C++, what is the downside to that?
The C compiler is faster and produces better error messages because it
doesn't get confused by things like function overloading. Since C and
C++ are different languages, it's reasonable for a user to want to build
their own work either way without recompiling the library (and still
using PETSc makefiles). I'm aware of --with-c-support, but I don't see
any point to building PETSc proper (disregarding Sieve) with a C++
More information about the petsc-dev