[petsc-dev] What is wrong with CHKERRQ() after PetscInitialize()?

Matthew Knepley knepley at gmail.com
Mon Sep 17 20:15:52 CDT 2012

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com>wrote:
>> This is bad design. We should setup CHKERRQ structs first. If they fail
>> during setup we should MPI_Abort.
> It is never okay to unconditionally call MPI_Abort.

What do you think we do when that Petsc Exception bottoms out?


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/20120917/df558580/attachment.html>

More information about the petsc-dev mailing list