[petsc-dev] the non-implemented case of PetscFEIntegrateResidual et al.

[Matthew Knepley]

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Geoffrey Irving <irving at naml.us> wrote:

> If a PetscFE object doesn't define integrateresidual, a call to
> PetscFEIntegrateResidual silently does nothing.  Is this intended
> behavior, or would it be better to complain similar to what happens
> for an undefined matrix operation?  I ask because I'm about to add an
> operation (PetscFEIntegrateScalars) which will initially only be
> defined in basic mode.


You are correct, it should error. THis is left over from me building it.

  Thanks,

     Matt


>
> Geoffrey
>



-- 
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/20140122/7edb0c0b/attachment.html>