[Petsc-trilinos-discussion] Scope and requirements

[Bartlett, Roscoe A.]

Then what is the issue with shared vs static libs? Why can't downstream client app just compile the petsc ml adapter, call the registration func then use ml under petsc like before?

-Ross

-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Brown [jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov<mailto:jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov>]
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 06:44 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: Matthew Knepley; Bartlett, Roscoe A.
Cc: Barry Smith; petsc-trilinos-discussion at lists.mcs.anl.gov
Subject: Re: [Petsc-trilinos-discussion] Scope and requirements

Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> writes:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_injection Yes, we use plugins in

> exactly the same way. They obey the top-level interface,

> just like your Stratimikos interfaces, and we instantiate the concrete type

> dynamically (we can load the appropriate DLL with a

> runtime option if necessary). It has been this way since I was in grad

> school in 1996.



PETSc's system is closer to what Martin Fowler refers to as "service

locator" in his essay which seems to be a popular reference, though the

techniques had been around for decades by the time he wrote the essay.



http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/injection.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-trilinos-discussion/attachments/20131122/435e880d/attachment.html>