Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:01:59PM +, Garth N. Wells wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
We still haven't decided on the correct strategy for choosing the
degree of an unspecified element.
What we have now looks at the total degree of the form and then sets
the degree acco
Anders Logg wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 09:15:53AM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:01:59PM +, Garth N. Wells wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
We still haven't decided on the correct strategy for choosing the
degree
Anders Logg wrote:
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 02:32:19PM -, nore...@launchpad.net wrote:
revno: 1348
committer: m...@simula.no
branch nick: ffc-dev
timestamp: Thu 2009-12-17 15:29:05 +0100
message:
Simple functionality now in pla
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_implement
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/6 Anders Logg :
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 11:24:04AM +0100, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/6 Anders Logg :
>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 foll
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:
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
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/8 :
revno: 1429
committer: Kristian B. Ølgaard
branch nick: dev
timestamp: Fri 2010-01-08 16:54:41 +0100
message:
Finished support for 3D Lagrange in evaluate_basis.
modified:
ffc/evaluatebasis.py
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_implement
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/12 Marie Rognes :
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
nore...@launchpad.net wrote:
revno: 1443
committer: Anders Logg
branch nick: ffc-dev
timestamp: Wed 2010-01-13 17:00:13 +0100
message:
Remove \n in formats
modified:
ffc/cpp.py
I like the \n in formats. Makes more sense to me
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 06:39:56PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
nore...@launchpad.net wrote:
revno: 1443
committer: Anders Logg
branch nick: ffc-dev
timestamp: Wed 2010-01-13 17:00:13 +0100
message:
Remove
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 08:27:33PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 06:39:56PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
nore...@launchpad.net wrote:
revno: 1443
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 09:26:25PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 08:27:33PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 06:39:56PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
nore
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:35:35PM -0800, Johan Hake wrote:
On Wednesday 13 January 2010 12:26:25 Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 08:27:33PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13
Johan Hake wrote:
On Wednesday 13 January 2010 12:26:25 Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 08:27:33PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 06:39:56PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
nore
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/14 Anders Logg :
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 06:16:00PM +0100, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/14 Anders Logg :
>Some indentation and newlines seem to need fixing in evaluate_basis.
Sure, evaluate_basis is using the old format, once _derivatives is
working I'll
Anders Logg wrote:
Marie, could you have a look at init_mesh? There seems to be a small
bug. For P1 elements, it generates
_global_dimension = m.num_entities[1];
It should be
_global_dimension = m.num_entities[0];
Fixed.
--
Marie
--
Anders
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 09:42:34PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
Marie, could you have a look at init_mesh? There seems to be a small
bug. For P1 elements, it generates
_global_dimension = m.num_entities[1];
It should be
_global_dimension
Anders Logg wrote:
Any idea why the RT2 unit test is failing?
Two ideas coming up:
(i) The interior moments for RT might have changed
(ii) There might be a bug in interior moments in FIAT.
--
Marie
AssertionError: -0.082755579782240435 != -0.21220022923833148
--
Anders
---
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/20 :
revno: 1494
committer: Marie E. Rognes
branch nick: ffc-unstable
timestamp: Wed 2010-01-20 21:43:48 +0100
message:
Somewhat evil and dead-slow (but very useful!) testing of generated
element a
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/20 :
revno: 1494
committer: Marie E. Rognes
branch nick: ffc-unstable
timestamp: Wed 2010-01-20 21:43:48 +0100
message:
Somewhat evil and dead-slow (but very useful!) testing of generated
element a
Marie Rognes wrote:
There is a doc-string in _change_variables in evaluatedof.py
on how the Piolas should work in case reminding is useful.
Actually, the one in interpolatevertex values is probably the relevant one.
--
Marie
___
Mailing list
Harish Narayanan wrote:
On 21/01/2010 14:19, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/21 :
revno: 1502
committer: Marie E. Rognes
branch nick: ffc-unstable
timestamp: Thu 2010-01-21 15:13:40 +0100
message:
Fixes for covariant piola.
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
I'm moving to the new format in cpp.py.
A few remarks:
'format' is a builtin function, so we should probably call it
something else.
I made some changes such that 'add' -> ' + ', 'mul' -> '*'.
If one wants something more intelligent 'addition' and 'multiply' maps
to
Summary of current status for non-mixed elements:
- CG matches old results for (at least) k = 1, ..., 4, which is good :)
Errors:
(1) The generated code for evaluate_basis_derivatives_all for DG_0 does
not compile.
Changes in output:
(i) num_sub_elements is 0 instead of 1 for all non-mixe
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/22 Marie Rognes :
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
I'm moving to the new format in cpp.py.
A few remarks:
'format' is a builtin function, so we should probably call it something
else.
I made some changes such that 'add' -> '
Anders Logg wrote:
I have pushed a changeset that simplifies the handling of integrals of
different types and domains. This unfortunately breaks the quadrature
but the changes should lead to large simplifications. I hope you're up
for it Kristian...
Tensor is broken too. Try MixedPoisson.
Would anyone object if I removed jacobian_nD in codesnippets and moved
only_jacobian_nD to jacobian_nD?
Also can we remove all the _FIAT_ stuff from codesnippets?
--
Marie
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchp
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:47:36PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Would anyone object if I removed jacobian_nD in codesnippets and
moved only_jacobian_nD to jacobian_nD?
Could you make sure to make the corresponding changes in
tensorgenerator.py, lines 66, 82, 99
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/25 Anders Logg :
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:47:36PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Would anyone object if I removed jacobian_nD in codesnippets and
moved only_jacobian_nD to jacobian_nD?
Could you make sure to make the corresponding changes in
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/25 Marie Rognes :
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/25 Anders Logg :
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:47:36PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Would anyone object if I removed jacobian_nD in codesnippets and
moved only_jacobian_nD to jacobian_nD?
Could you make sure
Let me know if I should do anything else than adding unit tests for
RT/BDM/NED.
(Aaargh, btw).
Is the jit compilation working?
--
Marie
Anders Logg wrote:
It's starting to look better. The following 8 tests are currently failing:
Generating code
---
1. ElementRestriction.ufl f
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 08:16:06PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Let me know if I should do anything else than adding unit tests for
RT/BDM/NED.
(Aaargh, btw).
I hope to add more a selection of elements to the regression tests
later. Then you can feel very free to help
Anders Logg wrote:
A list of misc bugs detected by the regression tests:
1. global_dimension
old = 10003
new = 10001
2. num_entity_dofs_2
old = 0
new = 1
(related to global_dimension error?)
3. interpolate_vertex_values
old = 0 0 0
new = 0.306 0.4256 0.7644
(strang
Anders Logg wrote:
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:34:49AM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
A list of misc bugs detected by the regression tests:
1. global_dimension
old = 10003
new = 10001
2. num_entity_dofs_2
old = 0
new = 1
(related to global_dimension error
Anders Logg wrote:
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:34:49AM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
A list of misc bugs detected by the regression tests:
1. global_dimension
old = 10003
new = 10001
2. num_entity_dofs_2
old = 0
new = 1
(related to global_dimension error
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 08:46:47PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 08:16:06PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Let me know if I should do anything else than adding unit tests for
RT/BDM/NED.
(Aaargh, btw).
I hope to
FFC compilation fails for
ElementRestriction.ufl
QuadratureElement.ufl
TensorWeightedPoisson.ufl
Running test programs fails for
P5tet.bin(Segmentation faults after evaluate_basis(0, ...)
Differences in output
evaluate_basis*
FacetIntegrals.out (missing value in
Medhi Nikbakht wrote:
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 15:50 +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
FFC compilation fails for
ElementRestriction.ufl
The error message says that "ElementRestriction" is not supported by
FIAT.
How will the restricted elements be implemented? Wouldn't i
Anders Logg wrote:
There's a bug in evaluate_dofs for tensor-valued elements.
For TensorWeightedPoisson, we get a segmentation fault because the
array named vals declared on line 1319 has length 2 when the
value_size is 4 (=2*2) for the mixed element. The vals array is used
as input to the evalu
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 08:48:10PM +0100, Anders Logg wrote:
Update:
FFC compilation fails for
ElementRestriction.ufl
QuadratureElement.ufl
GCC compilation works for all forms
Running test programs fails for
P5tet.bin
Output test fails for all forms
evaluate_
k.b.oelga...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm running some tests on evaluate_basis with different elements and
here are some results.
The following elements are no longer supported by FIAT:
Crouzeix-Raviart and Brezzi-Douglas-Fortin-Marini, will they be
supported again?
I would say that BDFM i
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/27 Medhi Nikbakht :
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 15:50 +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
FFC compilation fails for
ElementRestriction.ufl
The error message says that "ElementRestriction" is not supported by
FIAT.
How will the restricted elements be i
Garth N. Wells wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 09:14:36PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
2010/1/27 Medhi Nikbakht :
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 15:50 +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
FFC compilation fails for
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 28 January 2010 22:12, Garth N. Wells wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 28 January 2010 21:16, Garth N. Wells wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 07:51:52PM +0100, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 28 January 2010 19:18, Anders Logg wrote:
Up
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 01:23, Anders Logg wrote:
There seem to be just a couple of issues remaining in order of
importance:
1. QuadratureElement
2. DOLFIN fem unit test
3. evaluate_basis_derivatives
4. RestrictedElement
Among these, I would say 1-2 are crucial to fi
Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 01:23, Anders Logg wrote:
There seem to be just a couple of issues remaining in order of
importance:
1. QuadratureElement
2. DOLFIN fem unit test
3. evaluate_basis_derivatives
4. RestrictedElement
Among these, I would say
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 16:55, Marie Rognes wrote:
Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 01:23, Anders Logg wrote:
There seem to be just a couple of issues remaining in order of
importance:
1. QuadratureElement
2. DOLFIN fem unit test
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 18:46, Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 16:55, Marie Rognes wrote:
Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 01:23, Anders Logg wrote:
There seem to be just a couple of issues
Anders Logg wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 10:11:19PM +0100, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 21:47, Anders Logg wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 07:26:46PM +0100, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 29 January 2010 18:56, Anders Logg wrote:
It keeps getting better.
Garth N. Wells wrote:
There seems to be a nasty bug in the quadrature optimisation. I can
compute a result, but it's wrong. I can try to look into it in more
detail later, but I'm using a combination of BDM and P0 functions which
might be enough of a hint for someone.
Could you give a test
Garth N. Wells wrote:
Marie Rognes wrote:
Garth N. Wells wrote:
There seems to be a nasty bug in the quadrature optimisation. I can
compute a result, but it's wrong. I can try to look into it in more
detail later, but I'm using a combination of BDM and P0 functions whic
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 05:03:45PM +, Harish Narayanan wrote:
On 01/02/2010 16:41, Anders Logg wrote:
Works for me. Maybe instant-clean might help?
I've tried an instant-clean. I also wiped out my .py files from
site-packages and installed everything from
Anders Logg wrote:
Impressive! :-)
Is it release time or are we waiting for Kristian to do some magic
with evaluate_derivatives for Hdiv/curl?
Who the heck needs evaluate_derivatives for Hdiv/curl ;) ?
Throw error?
--
Marie
--
Anders
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 08:30:28PM -, nore...@
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 21:37, Anders Logg wrote:
Impressive! :-)
It sure is, many things could be handled in a much simpler way if it
wasn't for memory and runtime considerations of the optimisations. If
I get around to implementing the other optimisation strategy, we
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 22:02, Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 21:37, Anders Logg wrote:
Impressive! :-)
It sure is, many things could be handled in a much simpler way if it
wasn't for memory and runtime considerations o
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 22:32, Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 22:02, Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 21:37, Anders Logg wrote:
Impressive! :-)
It sure is, many things could be handled in a much
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 22:57, Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 22:32, Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 22:02, Marie Rognes wrote:
Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 1 February 2010 21:37, Anders Logg
More compile strangeness: Clean cache, error at first run,
things running at second run:
m...@localhost ~/local/src/fenics/adaptivity/demo $ instant-clean
Instant cache is empty
m...@localhost ~/local/src/fenics/adaptivity/demo $ python test.py
Calling FFC just-in-time (JIT) compiler, this may
Anders Logg wrote:
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 12:08:51PM +, Harish Narayanan wrote:
On 02/02/2010 11:29, Marie Rognes wrote:
More compile strangeness: Clean cache, error at first run,
things running at second run:
m...@localhost ~/local/src/fenics/adaptivity/demo $ instant-clean
Garth N. Wells wrote:
nore...@launchpad.net wrote:
revno: 1438
committer: Marie E. Rognes
branch nick: ffc
timestamp: Sun 2010-03-07 19:15:05 +0100
message:
Added support for Bubble elements, using ElementRestriction of
nore...@launchpad.net wrote:
revno: 1440
committer: Marie E. Rognes
branch nick: ffc
timestamp: Sun 2010-03-07 21:32:00 +0100
message:
Bug fixes in logic wrt unions of mixed elements. Human-readable code
generated for Mini looks co
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 06:20:00PM +0800, Garth N. Wells wrote:
On 22/03/10 16:42, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 21 March 2010 21:32, Anders Logg wrote:
After Marie's latest addition of enriched spaces (and some discussion
with Doug Arnold), it seems clear that
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:41:42AM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 06:20:00PM +0800, Garth N. Wells wrote:
On 22/03/10 16:42, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 21 March 2010 21:32, Anders Logg wrote
Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:41:42AM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 06:20:00PM +0800, Garth N. Wells wrote:
On 22/03/10 16:42, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 21 March 2010 21:32, Anders Logg wrote
The regression testing of Projection.ufl is failing for me (and has been
so for a while).
Could it be that the references have not been updated for this form?
The first part of the diff is as follows:
-// This code conforms with the UFC specification version 1.2
-// and was automaticall
code gives meaningful results.
--
Marie
Kristian
On 22 March 2010 13:49, Marie Rognes wrote:
The regression testing of Projection.ufl is failing for me (and has
been so
for a while).
Could it be that the references have not been updated for this form?
The first part of the diff is as fo
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:43:41PM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:41:42AM +0100, Marie Rognes wrote:
Anders Logg wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 06:20:00PM +0800, Garth N
nore...@launchpad.net wrote:
revno: 1450
committer: Marie E. Rognes
branch nick: ffc
timestamp: Tue 2010-03-23 23:08:17 +0100
message:
Bug fixes for tabulate_tensor for Enriched Mixed elements.
That was supposed to be tabulate_
(1) ffc does not expose ufl. Is this intentional? For instance, the
following gives a "FiniteElement not defined error"
from ffc import *
element = FiniteElement("CG", "triangle", 1)
(2) What is the purpose of the argument 'object_names' to
'compile_element'? It does not seem to be used a
Anders Logg wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 07:36:33PM +0100, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
On 24 March 2010 17:31, Marie Rognes wrote:
(1) ffc does not expose ufl. Is this intentional? For instance, the
following gives a "FiniteElement not defined error"
from ffc import *
Mehdi Nikbakht wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to use new syntax for the enriched elements. I don't see
the reason why we can not enrich an scaler element. Assume this form
file,
P1 = FiniteElement("Lagrange", triangle, 1)
Mini = P1 + P1
v = TestFunction(Mini)
u = TrialFunction(Mini)
a = inner(v
Marie Rognes wrote:
Mehdi Nikbakht wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to use new syntax for the enriched elements. I don't see
the reason why we can not enrich an scaler element. Assume this form
file,
P1 = FiniteElement("Lagrange", triangle, 1)
Mini = P1 + P1
v = TestF
Andy Ray Terrel wrote:
Okay I see. Its just a third order bubble, sometimes I send mail
before I think. The mini element is a first order bubble or at least
that's what Brezzi Fortin say.
That depends on your definition of the word "is".
The "velocity" part of the (lowest order) Mini ele
Andy Ray Terrel wrote:
Okay so Brezzi Fortin have just a bubble function with one node.
Perhaps they meant P3 but their notation is ambiguous.
ArnoldBrezziFortin1984 does call for the P3 in the original paper but
then they mention using 2 P4 bubble functions for the next velocity
order. If I do
On 04. juni 2010 15:23, build...@fenics.org wrote:
> The Buildbot has detected a new failure of ffc-jaunty-amd64 on FEniCS
> Buildbot.
> Full details are available at:
> http://fenics.org:8080/builders/ffc-jaunty-amd64/builds/372
>
> Buildbot URL: http://fenics.org:8080/
>
> Buildslave for this B
Original Message
Subject:Re: function on EnrichedElement
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:27:44 +0200
From: Marie Rognes
To: Mehdi
CC: gn...@cam.ac.uk, Anders Logg
On 15. juni 2010 15:12, Mehdi wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 14:26 +0200, Marie Rognes wr
On 16. juni 2010 13:41, Mehdi wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 15:35 +0200, Marie Rognes wrote:
>
>>
>> Original Message
>> Subject:
>> Re: function on EnrichedElement
>> Date:
On 16. juni 2010 15:51, Mehdi wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 14:03 +0200, Marie Rognes wrote:
>
>> On 16. juni 2010 13:41, Mehdi wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 15:35 +0200, Marie Rognes wrote:
>>>
>&
>>> On 16 June 2010 16:45, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 16/06/10 15:20, Marie Rognes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16. juni 2010 15:51, Mehdi wrote:
>>>>>>
On 18. juni 2010 11:38, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
> On 18 June 2010 01:44, Marie Rognes wrote:
>
>> On 17. juni 2010 15:44, Mehdi wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 18:04 +0200, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Mehdi and I discussed this a bit
On 18. juni 2010 12:23, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
> On 18 June 2010 12:05, Marie Rognes wrote:
>
>> On 18. juni 2010 11:38, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
>>
>>> On 18 June 2010 01:44, Marie Rognes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 17. juni
On 18. juni 2010 13:43, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
> On 18 June 2010 13:20, Mehdi wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 12:34 +0200, Marie Rognes wrote:
>>
>>> On 18. juni 2010 12:23, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
>>>
>>>
On 18. juni 2010 15:08, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
> On 18 June 2010 14:12, Marie Rognes wrote:
>
>> On 18. juni 2010 13:43, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
>>
>> On 18 June 2010 13:20, Mehdi wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 12:34 +0200, Marie Rog
On 18. juni 2010 16:16, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
> On 18 June 2010 15:19, Marie Rognes wrote:
>
>> On 18. juni 2010 15:08, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
>>
>>> On 18 June 2010 14:12, Marie Rognes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 18. juni
On 18. juni 2010 16:23, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
> On 18 June 2010 15:25, Mehdi wrote:
>
>>
>> If we want to address this issue, the same concept should be also
>> considered for ElementRestriction. What would we expect if we enrich a
>> vector element with a restricted vector element?
>>
>> V
On 18. juni 2010 17:09, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
> On 18 June 2010 16:28, Marie Rognes wrote:
>
>> On 18. juni 2010 16:16, Kristian Oelgaard wrote:
>>
>>> On 18 June 2010 15:19, Marie Rognes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
Just checking: should this form
L = u*dx
be ok?
--
Marie
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc
Post to : ffc@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
On 17. nov. 2010 14:36, Patrick Riesen wrote:
> hello,
> i'm trying to update my code for the most recent fenics development
> versions.
>
> compiling+demos for ffc/ufl/dolfin etc. is all ok.
>
> now my code has a problem, i have the following in the ufl-file:
>
>
> e = as_matrix([[0.5*u.dx(0)
On 17. nov. 2010 16:15, Patrick Riesen wrote:
> Nope, won't do differnt with Zero().
> Here is a simple complete program:
> -
> cell = interval
> FE = FiniteElement("CG", cell, 2)
>
> v = TestFunction(FE)
> U = TrialFunction(FE)
>
> u
e_form_arities crashes in ListTensor
>
>
That bug was related to the same functionality, but a different problem
(which is fixed).
So, feel free to open a new one.
--
Marie
> anyway, many thanks and best regards,
> patrick
>
> On 11/17/2010 05:28 PM, Marie Rognes wrote:
>> On 1
92 matches
Mail list logo
