Yes, see here:

http://www.fenics.org/wiki/Download

--
Anders

On 7 Apr, 20:48, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Anders Logg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >  On 7 Apr, 16:47, "Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >  > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:15 PM, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >  > >  On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > wrote:
>
> >  > >  >  On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Mike Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > wrote:
>
> >  > >  >  >  On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 6:25 AM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL 
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >  > >  >  >  >  Yes, I did. This is the code developed by people at Simula. 
> > It works
> >  > >  >  >  >  nice, but it's quite difficult to install. I generally 
> > prefer smaller
> >  > >  >  >  >  tools, if I can get the job done.
>
> >  > >  >  >  >  Ondrej
>
> >  > >  >  >  Other than size and build issues, are the two projects 
> > equivalent
> >  > >  >  >  feature / speed-wise?
>
> >  > >  >  To my purposes, sfepy is better than fenics, because sfepy is in
> >  > >  >  python (and can do all I need). As to speed, that's about the same,
> >  > >  >  because the mainloop of sfepy for the assembly is in pure C, 
> > without
> >  > >  >  any python callbacks. Also because it's smaller, I find it simpler 
> > to
> >  > >  >  use. But Fenics definitely is also good and have it's users.
>
> >  > >  Feature-wise, is Fenics better than sfepy?
>
> >  > I tried Fenics about a year ago, so they may have improved. For my own
> >  > purposes, i.e. solving a PDE, with Neumann or Dirichlet boundary
> >  > conditions,
> >  > assigning different material properties to different regions in the
> >  > body, etc., sfepy is better in a sense, that I was able to do what I
> >  > want in it (with the help of Robert) easier than in Fenics.
>
> >  > > You did seem to indicate sfepy
> >  > >  is smaller. Is it because Fenics does more?
>
> >  > Because they are doing almost everything in C++, while sfepy uses a
> >  > very clever approach of only doing the main assembly loop in pure C,
> >  > otherwise doing everything in Python (so it's the same fast as the
> >  > libmesh (also C++ library) for my own purposes). Also, at the time I
> >  > tried Fenics, I had to code in C++ to do what I want. I don't like
> >  > that, I prefer
> >  > to work in Python (in sfepy, you don't have to touch the C code,
> >  > unless you want to do something very unusual). But they may have
> >  > improved since then.
>
> >  > > Also, isn't Fenics also in
> >  > >  C+Python?
>
> >  > It's Python + C++. I don't like C++, I really prefer Python + C, it's
> >  > easier to understand, cleaner, more portable, easier to wrap in
> >  > Python, etc.
>
> >  > Well, download the sources of Dolfin and sfepy and see for yourself.
> >  > It takes less than 30s to compile sfepy on my computer. I haven't
> >  > tried dolphin, because it requires some dependencies I don't have, but
> >  > I am sure it will take at least 20x more time. Sfepy only requires
> >  > numpy+scipy.
>
> >  > Ondrej
>
> >  Just a few comments.
>
> >  1. Yes, we have improved (as always... :-) but it's still far from
> >  finished.
>
> >  There's a simple example demonstrating the solution of Poisson's
> >  equation
> >  on this page:http://www.fenics.org/wiki/Tutorial
>
> >  More demos can be found here:
>
> >  http://www.fenics.org/hg/dolfin?cmd=manifest;manifest=e91acc1d9b39276...
>
> >  2. Yes, FEniCS is fairly complex:http://www.fenics.org/wiki/Projects
>
> >  However, this shouldn't be a problem for users, and there are (Ubuntu)
> >  packages
> >  that let you install everything by just doing apt-get install fenics.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/wdj/computer_algebra/dolfin$ sudo apt-get install fenics
> [sudo] password for wdj:
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> E: Couldn't find package fenics
>
> Maybe a site has to be added to /etc/sources?
>
>
>
> >  --
> >  Anders
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to