[petsc-dev] KSPAddOptionsChecker() needed?

[Matthew Knepley]

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

>
>   PetscObjectAddOptionsHandler(PetscObject, PetscErrorCode
> (*)(PetscObject,void*),void *ctx)   ?
>

Better.

   Matt

   Barry
>
> On Jun 24, 2010, at 9:07 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
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/20100625/0cf25e66/attachment.html>