[petsc-dev] Fortran Interfaces and interrupting SNESSolve

[John O'Sullivan]

Thanks Barry,

Works a treat. Exactly what we're after.

John
--
Dr John O'Sullivan
Lecturer
Department of Engineering Science
University of Auckland, New Zealand
email: jp.osullivan at auckland.ac.nz
tel: +64 (0)9 923 85353

________________________________________
From: Barry Smith [bsmith at mcs.anl.gov]
Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2015 10:38 a.m.
To: Matthew Knepley
Cc: John O'Sullivan; PETSc
Subject: Re: [petsc-dev] Fortran Interfaces and interrupting SNESSolve

> On Jun 24, 2015, at 10:03 AM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 9:48 AM, John O'Sullivan <jp.osullivan at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> I's just wondering if you'd had a chance to do the Fortran interface for SNESSetUpdate?
>
> I don't know how to do this one since we overhauled our Fortran callbacks. Jed or Satish?
>
> Also what would you guys recommend for interrupting SNESSolve? For example when the solution vector is outside the range for the RHS function that can be evaluated.

   I assume you mean the "current solution" vector is outside of the domain of the RHS?
>
> I think the new scheme is to return a NaN. Is that right Barry?

   Yes, just put a Inf into the function vector (at any location). Then  then SNES will end with a SNES_DIVERGED_FNORM_NAN.

   Barry

>
>   Matt
>
> Cheers
> John
>
> --
> Dr John O'Sullivan
> Lecturer
> Department of Engineering Science
> University of Auckland, New Zealand
> email:
> jp.osullivan at auckland.ac.nz
>
> tel: +64 (0)9 923 85353
>
> From: petsc-dev-bounces at mcs.anl.gov [petsc-dev-bounces at mcs.anl.gov] on behalf of Matthew Knepley [knepley at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 June 2015 10:30 p.m.
> To: Marco Zocca
> Cc: PETSc
> Subject: Re: [petsc-dev] "pure" subset of operators
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Marco Zocca <zocca.marco at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> is there an index of the PETSc operations (e.g. mathematical on Vec's
> and Mat's) that do NOT overwrite the operands?
> I understand in-place operations are more efficient, but they make it
> harder to reason about the program's operation.
>
> We do not make a separate list of these.
>
>   Thanks,
>
>      Matt
>
> Thank you in advance
>
>
>
> --
> 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