[petsc-dev] Is ./configure --help broken?

[Matthew Knepley]

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Jed Brown <jed at jedbrown.org> wrote:

> Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 1:17 PM, Jed Brown <jed at jedbrown.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > I agree. We should remove all code (about 2/3 of it) which does a
> >> > hierarchy of communicating dicts (the original design). That would
> >> > make everything simple.  No threads, no parents, etc. We leave in the
> >> > help the way we want it, types for args, etc. One thing its notably
> >> > missing, and that PETSc Options are missing, is listing the thing that
> >> > set the option (default, command line, code, env).
> >>
> >> Does RDict even need to be persistent?  Who all reads it?  I wonder if
> >> an existing human-readable file would be sufficient instead?
> >>
> >
> > I think we should persist the entire set of options used to configure for
> > later
> > interrogation, however we have not done that much so far.
>
> CONFIGURE_OPTIONS is written to petscvariables and printed by make info.
> I think fewer duplications is desirable.
>

This gets into a separate discussion. I think Python info is more useful
since its
directly visible to scripts we might write.

   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

https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/ <http://www.caam.rice.edu/~mk51/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20180316/a6e26970/attachment.html>