[petsc-dev] Okay, petscmath.h is a complete piece of crap and now its breaking my build

[Matthew Knepley]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Jed Brown <jed at 59a2.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 19:44, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Verification of preprocess code is exactly as intensive, since you have to
>> compile each version. What is your point here?
>>
>
> You can see all possible variants using a widely used and standardized
> language with editor support, the turn-around time for a correctness check
> is less because you don't have to reconfigure.
>

Again, I could say exactly the same thing. I can jsut look at the Python and
see all possible variants. This is not an argument.


>
>> The code I had would have continued to work, rather than break.
>>
>
> Why did you bother pulling/updating if you wanted to work with an old
> version? This sounds more like a problem of you/the build system not knowing
> when to reconfigure.
>

In my scenario, it would have been easy to tell what was going on. Here it
was hard.

  Matt

-- 
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/20110315/c2197e09/attachment.html>