Re: changes for next PETSc release

[Barry Smith <bsmith@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 17, 2008, at 10:23 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:38 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith@xxxxxxxxxxx>  
> wrote:
> >     There are two significant  changes I'd like to see before the
> > next PETSc release:
> >
> > 1) remove the overly complicated (from a user perspective) matrix
> > subclassing for the various external
> >      matrix solver packages and replace with MatSolverSetType() -
> > mat_solver_type <type> that simply
> >      flips the various factorization/solver functions with those
> > requested and
>
> This seems not too hard. Just a layer on top to run the code a user  
> must
> run now.

   It is not very hard, but piling shit on top of shit is not the  
best way to
write software. I have a method to reorganize that removes the old shit
thus both simplifying the model and making it more user friendly.

> > 2) properly name-space PETSc by putting a Petsc in front of all PETSc
> > objects, function names etc
> >      (this will require changing a few names also to keep them below
> > the 32 character limit). This will
> >      be very painful change for some users who are not comfortable
> > ever changing code, hence I hesitate
> >      to do it, but it is the right thing to do and should have been
> > done originally.
>
> I guess I still do not see the need for this. NIMROD is a not a  
> sufficient
> driver in my mind.

   You are an elitist who thinks that important ideas can only come
from important/smart people. This I disagree strongly with, one should
look everywhere, even at the local dump, for good ideas. NIMROD is
not the driver, it is merely the spark.

> If we really want namespaces, use a real language that
> has namespaces. There are plenty. If we are still using C, I say we  
> stick
> with the old division. The imposition of this much pain on the  
> overwhelming
> majority of users seems unjustified.

   You seem to be saying we should stick with a bad decision I made
many years ago, just because it is painful to change. When did you
suddenly become conservative?
> Namespaces issues can be trivially fixed in say C++, which we should  
> do.
>
>    Matt
>
> >     Maybe we can do a release in around a couple of months, it would
> > be 2.4
> >
> >    Barry
>
>
>
> --
> 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