date:20100107

Re: [Ffc] Status

2010-01-07 Thread Anders Logg

On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 04:25:30PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
> Anders Logg wrote:
> >We've come pretty far on the rewrite of FFC and only a few functions
> >remain. As far as I can see, it remains to implement code generation
> >for the following functions:
> >
> >Kristian:
> >
> >  code["evaluate_basis_all"] = not_implemented
> >  code["evaluate_basis_derivatives"] = not_implemented
> >  code["evaluate_basis_derivatives_all"] = not_implemented
> >
> >Marie:
> >
> >  code["tabulate_entity_dofs"] = not_implemented # Marie doesn't know what 
> > this function should do
>
>
> Evidently, my comment was unclear ;)
>
> Should it look like this for CG_1?
>
>  /// Tabulate the local-to-local mapping of dofs on entity (d, i)
>  virtual void tabulate_entity_dofs(unsigned int* dofs,
>unsigned int d, unsigned int i) const
>  {
>   dofs[0] = i   }

Yes, this function should return an array of the dofs (dof indices) for
the dofs associated with entity number i of dimension d.

But perhaps we should check the d and the i as well to make sure that
d == 0 and i <= d + 1?

Here's another example of what should happen for P3 in 2D.

  switch (d)
  {
  case 0:
if (i > 2)
  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
dofs[0] = i;
  case 1:
if (i > 2)
  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
dofs[0] = 3 + 2*i;
dofs[1] = 3 + 2*i + 1;
  case 2:
if (i > 0)
  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
dofs[0] = 10;
  default:
throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
  }

The corresponding function num_entity_dofs should return the size of
the dofs array for each dimension so it should return 0, 2 and 1 in
the above case for d = 0, 1, 2.

> >  code["tabulate_coordinates"] = not_implemented # Marie doesn't believe in 
> > this function
> >
>
>
> What should this function do for the integral moment dofs, where
> there are more than one point per dof?

I guess we need to throw an exception and think about possibly extending the
UFC interface with this extra information.

--
Anders


> >Marie or Kristian:
> >
> >  code["interpolate_vertex_values"] = not_implemented
> >
>
> Can fix.
>
>


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Ffc] [nore...@launchpad.net: [Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/dev] Rev 1412: Implemented interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.]

2010-01-07 Thread Anders Logg

Which ones need to be cleaned up?

I'll be working on getting tabulate_tensor working. Let me know if I
should help with the cleaning up.

--
Anders
--- Begin Message ---

revno: 1412
committer: Marie E. Rognes 
branch nick: ffc-unstable
timestamp: Thu 2010-01-07 14:16:49 +0100
message:
  Implemented interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.
  
  Time to do some clean-ups with regard to code generation utilities
  before continuing.
modified:
  ffc/codegeneration.py
  ffc/fiatinterface.py
  ffc/representation.py


--
lp:~ffc-core/ffc/dev
https://code.launchpad.net/~ffc-core/ffc/dev

You are subscribed to branch lp:~ffc-core/ffc/dev.
To unsubscribe from this branch go to 
https://code.launchpad.net/~ffc-core/ffc/dev/+edit-subscription.
=== modified file 'ffc/codegeneration.py'
--- ffc/codegeneration.py	2010-01-06 18:32:59 +
+++ ffc/codegeneration.py	2010-01-07 13:16:49 +
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
 __copyright__ = "Copyright (C) 2009 " + __author__
 __license__  = "GNU GPL version 3 or any later version"
 
-# Last changed: 2010-01-06
+# Last changed: 2010-01-07
 
 # FFC modules
 from ffc.log import begin, end, debug_code
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
 # FFC code generation modules
 from ffc.evaluatebasis import _evaluate_basis
 from ffc.evaluatedof import _evaluate_dof, _evaluate_dofs, affine_weights
+from ffc.codesnippets import jacobian
 
 # FFC specialized code generation modules
 #from ffc.quadrature import generate_quadrature_integrals
@@ -98,7 +99,7 @@
 code["evaluate_basis_derivatives_all"] = not_implemented
 code["evaluate_dof"] = _evaluate_dof(ir["evaluate_dof"])
 code["evaluate_dofs"] = _evaluate_dofs(ir["evaluate_dofs"])
-code["interpolate_vertex_values"] = not_implemented
+code["interpolate_vertex_values"] = _interpolate_vertex_values(ir["interpolate_vertex_values"])
 code["num_sub_elements"] = ret(ir["num_sub_elements"])
 code["create_sub_element"] = _create_foo(ir["create_sub_element"], prefix, "finite_element")
 
@@ -264,31 +265,64 @@
 
 def _tabulate_coordinates(ir):
 
+# Raise error if tabulate_coordinates is ill-defined
 if ir is None:
 return "// Raise error here"
 
 # Extract formats:
-add = format["add"]
-multiply = format["multiply"]
+add, multiply = format["add"], format["multiply"]
 precision = format["float"]
 
 # Extract coordinates and cell dimension
-coordinates = ir
-cell_dim = len(coordinates[0])
+cell_dim = len(ir[0])
 
 # Aid mapping points from reference to physical element
 coefficients = affine_weights(cell_dim)
 
+# Generate code for each point and each component
 code = ["const double * const * x = c.coordinates;"]
-
-for (i, c) in enumerate(coordinates):
-w = coefficients(c)
+for (i, coordinate) in enumerate(ir):
+w = coefficients(coordinate)
 for j in range(cell_dim):
 value = add([multiply([precision(w[k]), "x[%d][%d]" % (k, j)])
  for k in range(cell_dim + 1)])
 code += ["coordinates[%d][%d] = %s;" % (i, j, value)]
 return "\n".join(code)
 
+def _interpolate_vertex_values(ir):
+
+code = []
+
+# Add code for Jacobian if necessary
+if ir["needs_jacobian"]:
+code += [jacobian(ir["cell_dim"])]
+
+# Extract formats
+add, multiply = format["add"], format["multiply"]
+precision = format["float"]
+
+# Iterate over the elements
+for (k, data) in enumerate(ir["element_data"]):
+
+# Extract vertex values for all basis functions
+vertex_values = data["basis_values"]
+
+# Create code for each vertex
+for j in range(len(vertex_values)):
+
+# Map basis values according to mapping
+vertex_value = [precision(v) for v in vertex_values[j]]
+
+# Contract basis values and coefficients
+value = add([multiply(["dof_values[%d]" % i, v])
+ for (i, v) in enumerate(vertex_value)])
+
+# Construct correct vertex value label
+name = "vertex_values[%d]" % j
+code += [name + " = " +  value + ";"]
+
+return "\n".join(code)
+
 #--- Utility functioins ---
 
 def _create_foo(numbers, prefix, class_name):

=== modified file 'ffc/fiatinterface.py'
--- ffc/fiatinterface.py	2010-01-04 12:48:48 +
+++ ffc/fiatinterface.py	2010-01-07 13:16:49 +
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 
 # Modified by Garth N. Wells, 2009.
 # Modified by Marie Rognes, 2009-2010.
-# Last changed: 2010-01-04
+# Last changed: 2010-01-07
 
 # UFL modules
 from ufl import FiniteElement as UFLFiniteElement
@@ -44,6 +44,11 @@
 # Mapping from dimension to number of mesh sub-entities:
 entities_per_dim = {1: [2, 1], 2: [3, 3, 1], 3: [4, 6, 4, 1]}
 
+def reference_cell(dim):
+if isinstance(dim, int):
+return ufc_simplex(dim)
+else:
+return ufc_simplex(domain2dim[dim])
 
 def create_element(ufl_element):
 
@@ -70,7 +75,7 @@

Re: [Ffc] Status

2010-01-07 Thread Marie Rognes


Anders Logg wrote:

On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 04:25:30PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
  

Anders Logg wrote:


We've come pretty far on the rewrite of FFC and only a few functions
remain. As far as I can see, it remains to implement code generation
for the following functions:

Kristian:

 code["evaluate_basis_all"] = not_implemented
 code["evaluate_basis_derivatives"] = not_implemented
 code["evaluate_basis_derivatives_all"] = not_implemented

Marie:

 code["tabulate_entity_dofs"] = not_implemented # Marie doesn't know what this 
function should do
  

Evidently, my comment was unclear ;)

Should it look like this for CG_1?

 /// Tabulate the local-to-local mapping of dofs on entity (d, i)
 virtual void tabulate_entity_dofs(unsigned int* dofs,
   unsigned int d, unsigned int i) const
 {
  dofs[0] = i   }



Yes, this function should return an array of the dofs (dof indices) for
the dofs associated with entity number i of dimension d.

But perhaps we should check the d and the i as well to make sure that
d == 0 and i <= d + 1?

Here's another example of what should happen for P3 in 2D.

  switch (d)
  {
  case 0:
if (i > 2)
  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
dofs[0] = i;
  case 1:
if (i > 2)
  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
dofs[0] = 3 + 2*i;
dofs[1] = 3 + 2*i + 1;
  case 2:
if (i > 0)
  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
dofs[0] = 10;
  default:
throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
  }

  


Ok!


The corresponding function num_entity_dofs should return the size of
the dofs array for each dimension so it should return 0, 2 and 1 in
the above case for d = 0, 1, 2.

  


Fixed already.


 code["tabulate_coordinates"] = not_implemented # Marie doesn't believe in this 
function

  

What should this function do for the integral moment dofs, where
there are more than one point per dof?



I guess we need to throw an exception and think about possibly extending the
UFC interface with this extra information.

  


Will throw.

--
Marie



--
Anders


  

Marie or Kristian:

 code["interpolate_vertex_values"] = not_implemented

  

Can fix.






___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ffc] [nore...@launchpad.net: [Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/dev] Rev 1412: Implemented interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.]

2010-01-07 Thread Marie Rognes


Anders Logg wrote:

Which ones need to be cleaned up?

I'll be working on getting tabulate_tensor working. Let me know if I
should help with the cleaning up.

  


I'm boldly throwing away anything that seems obsolete

--
Marie



--
Anders
  




Subject:
[Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/dev] Rev 1412: Implemented 
interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.

From:
nore...@launchpad.net
Date:
Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:19:14 -
To:
Anders Logg 

To:
Anders Logg 



revno: 1412
committer: Marie E. Rognes 
branch nick: ffc-unstable
timestamp: Thu 2010-01-07 14:16:49 +0100
message:
  Implemented interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.
  
  Time to do some clean-ups with regard to code generation utilities

  before continuing.
modified:
  ffc/codegeneration.py
  ffc/fiatinterface.py
  ffc/representation.py


--
lp:~ffc-core/ffc/dev
https://code.launchpad.net/~ffc-core/ffc/dev

You are subscribed to branch lp:~ffc-core/ffc/dev.
To unsubscribe from this branch go to 
https://code.launchpad.net/~ffc-core/ffc/dev/+edit-subscription.
  



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ffc] Status

2010-01-07 Thread Anders Logg

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 03:04:35PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
> Anders Logg wrote:
> >On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 04:25:30PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
> >>Anders Logg wrote:
> >>>We've come pretty far on the rewrite of FFC and only a few functions
> >>>remain. As far as I can see, it remains to implement code generation
> >>>for the following functions:
> >>>
> >>>Kristian:
> >>>
> >>> code["evaluate_basis_all"] = not_implemented
> >>> code["evaluate_basis_derivatives"] = not_implemented
> >>> code["evaluate_basis_derivatives_all"] = not_implemented
> >>>
> >>>Marie:
> >>>
> >>> code["tabulate_entity_dofs"] = not_implemented # Marie doesn't know what 
> >>> this function should do
> >>Evidently, my comment was unclear ;)
> >>
> >>Should it look like this for CG_1?
> >>
> >> /// Tabulate the local-to-local mapping of dofs on entity (d, i)
> >> virtual void tabulate_entity_dofs(unsigned int* dofs,
> >>   unsigned int d, unsigned int i) const
> >> {
> >>  dofs[0] = i   }
> >
> >Yes, this function should return an array of the dofs (dof indices) for
> >the dofs associated with entity number i of dimension d.
> >
> >But perhaps we should check the d and the i as well to make sure that
> >d == 0 and i <= d + 1?
> >
> >Here's another example of what should happen for P3 in 2D.
> >
> >  switch (d)
> >  {
> >  case 0:
> >if (i > 2)
> >  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
> >dofs[0] = i;
> >  case 1:
> >if (i > 2)
> >  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
> >dofs[0] = 3 + 2*i;
> >dofs[1] = 3 + 2*i + 1;
> >  case 2:
> >if (i > 0)
> >  throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
> >dofs[0] = 10;
> >  default:
> >throw std::runtime_error("Sensible error message.");
> >  }
> >
>
> Ok!
>
> >The corresponding function num_entity_dofs should return the size of
> >the dofs array for each dimension so it should return 0, 2 and 1 in
> >the above case for d = 0, 1, 2.
> >
>
> Fixed already.

Nice! :-)

--
Anders


> >>> code["tabulate_coordinates"] = not_implemented # Marie doesn't believe in 
> >>> this function
> >>>
> >>What should this function do for the integral moment dofs, where
> >>there are more than one point per dof?
> >
> >I guess we need to throw an exception and think about possibly extending the
> >UFC interface with this extra information.
> >
>
> Will throw.
>
> --
> Marie
>
>
> >--
> >Anders
> >
> >
> >>>Marie or Kristian:
> >>>
> >>> code["interpolate_vertex_values"] = not_implemented
> >>>
> >>Can fix.
> >>
> >>
>


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ffc] [nore...@launchpad.net: [Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/dev] Rev 1412: Implemented interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.]

2010-01-07 Thread Anders Logg

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 03:07:28PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
> Anders Logg wrote:
> >Which ones need to be cleaned up?
> >
> >I'll be working on getting tabulate_tensor working. Let me know if I
> >should help with the cleaning up.
> >
>
> I'm boldly throwing away anything that seems obsolete

Good!

--
Anders


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ffc] [Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/main] Rev 1332: Add new operators for the symbolics classes and rearrange unit tests for maintainability.

2010-01-07 Thread Anders Logg

I haven't looked very closely at the symbolic stuff before, but it
seems a bit strange to have so much symbolic classes in FFC when we
have UFL as a symbolic backend.

Could this functionality be added to UFL instead?

--
Anders


On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 05:48:17PM -, nore...@launchpad.net wrote:
> 
> revno: 1332
> committer: Kristian B. Ølgaard 
> branch nick: ffc
> timestamp: Thu 2010-01-07 18:45:09 +0100
> message:
>   Add new operators for the symbolics classes and rearrange unit tests for 
> maintainability.
> removed:
>   test/unit/test_symbolics.py
> added:
>   test/unit/symbolics/
>   test/unit/symbolics/testdgelastodyn.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testelasticity2d.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testelasticityterm.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testelasweighted.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testelasweighted2.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testexpandoperations.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testfloat.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testfloatoperators.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testfraction.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testfractionoperators.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testmixedsymbols.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testnotfinished.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testpoisson.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testproduct.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testproductoperators.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testrealexamples.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testreducegip.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testreduceoperations.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testreducevartype.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testsum.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testsumoperators.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testsymbol.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testsymbolics.py
>   test/unit/symbolics/testsymboloperators.py
> modified:
>   AUTHORS
>   ffc/log.py
>   ffc/quadrature/floatvalue.py
>   ffc/quadrature/fraction.py
>   ffc/quadrature/product.py
>   ffc/quadrature/sumobj.py
>   ffc/quadrature/symbol.py
>   test/unit/test.py
> The size of the diff (6018 lines) is larger than your specified limit of 1000 
> lines
>


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Ffc] Status

[Ffc] [nore...@launchpad.net: [Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/dev] Rev 1412: Implemented interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.]

Re: [Ffc] Status

Re: [Ffc] [nore...@launchpad.net: [Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/dev] Rev 1412: Implemented interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.]

Re: [Ffc] Status

Re: [Ffc] [nore...@launchpad.net: [Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/dev] Rev 1412: Implemented interpolate_vertex_values for scalar CG_1.]

Re: [Ffc] [Branch ~ffc-core/ffc/main] Rev 1332: Add new operators for the symbolics classes and rearrange unit tests for maintainability.

7 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information