[petsc-dev] KSPAddOptionsChecker() needed?

[Matthew Knepley]

I am for the uniform PetscObjectAddOptionsChecker(). Should it really be
called
Checker?  Sounds like validation. I think there is some value in treating
SetFromOptions
as a generic facility that can be extended. This is "aspect oriented
programming" :)

   Matt

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

>
>   KSPAddOptionsChecker() is never used in PETSc. Is it needed? Can it be
> removed?
>
>   Or should we have a PetscObjectAddOptionsChecker() instead, thus
> expanding this (unneeded capability) to all PETSc objects/solvers?
>
>    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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20100625/3e14e79c/attachment.html>