Skip to content

Conversation

@atgeirr
Copy link
Member

@atgeirr atgeirr commented May 31, 2023

This makes the old and new linearizers behave in the same way, and the code is a bit simpler and clearer. Builds on and replaces #772

Some changes here are directly #772 so I made @totto82 the author, but the commits are new here and not cherry-picked from the other branch.

@atgeirr
Copy link
Member Author

atgeirr commented May 31, 2023

jenkins build this please

@atgeirr
Copy link
Member Author

atgeirr commented Jun 2, 2023

jenkins build this please

for (unsigned eqIdx = 0; eqIdx < numEq; ++eqIdx) {
tmp2[eqIdx] = Toolbox::value(tmp[eqIdx]);
}
if (!elemCtx.haveStashedIntensiveQuantities()) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Huh, interesting. I'd not come across that function before. Its documentation is a little hard to comprehend though, since it states that the function

returns true if NO intensive quantities are stashed

Is that accurate?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have also not really come across it. The mechanism is used to stash away data for a cell before perturbing the element context for finite difference derivative evaluations, and then restoring it afterwards, so its removal from the logic made such cases fail.

The doc is wrong...

@atgeirr
Copy link
Member Author

atgeirr commented Jun 5, 2023

jenkins build this please

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants