[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PETSc-FUN3D Code

To: petsc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: PETSc-FUN3D Code
From: Satish Balay <balay@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 09:12:02 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: Dinesh Kaushik <kaushik@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <Pine.OSX.4.64.0710201647200.14706@bsmith.mcs.anl.gov>
References: <4718B5F6.3040301@mcs.anl.gov> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710190915180.3920@asterix> <4718BF02.70405@mcs.anl.gov> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191000020.3920@asterix> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191056430.3920@asterix> <4718DDE2.2070607@mcs.anl.gov> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191142340.3920@asterix> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191145310.3920@asterix> <4718E329.1010804@mcs.anl.gov> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191222010.3920@asterix> <4718F0C6.7080908@mcs.anl.gov> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191328580.3920@asterix> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191359050.3920@asterix> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191422350.3920@asterix> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710191438470.3920@asterix> <47193D94.5020600@mcs.anl.gov> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710201047000.3920@asterix> <Pine.OSX.4.64.0710201647200.14706@bsmith.mcs.anl.gov>
Reply-to: petsc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-petsc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Barry Smith wrote:

>    I don't know; there are pros and cons to the two
> approaches. 
> 
>    Why not PetscSize_T? I admit both look stupid, but the
> _ at least matches the standard C style.

Barry,

Our use of caps can be considered as a subtitute for '_'. And
PetscSizeT matches our current convention. [i.e currently no datatype
has an '_'.]. I've pused fortran changes using PetscSizeT.

thanks,
Satish

References:
- Re: PETSc-FUN3D Code
  - From: Barry Smith

Prev by Date: Re: PETSc-FUN3D Code
Next by Date: Re: PETSc-FUN3D Code
Previous by thread: Re: PETSc-FUN3D Code
Next by thread: leaks in multiple calls for preallocating AIJ matrices
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread