[petsc-dev] Why separate PCASMGetSubKSP/PCGASMGetSubKSP/PCBJacobiGetSubKSP?

[Richard Tran Mills]

Folks,

I see that we have separate interface routines PCASMGetSubKSP(),
PCGASMGetSubKSP(), and PCBJacobiGetSubKSP(), all of which have an identical
interface and do the same thing. It seems like there ought to instead be
just one routine called something like PCGetSubKSP(). Is there a good
reason that we don't have this? Perhaps because there is
also PCFieldSplitGetSubKSP(), which has a different interface? We'd need a
name other than PCGetSubKSP() to prevent confusion between these. I suppose
the ASM/GASM/BJacobi routines really all do the same thing, but we break
our naming conventions if we have to have a get sub-KSP routine that works
for these there things, and then one that works for FieldSplit.

OK, I think maybe I just answered my question, but I'd like to know if
Barry or others have thoughts on this.

--Richard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20170920/efb389ea/attachment.html>