-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 109
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Unify signatures of mesh constructors #1194
Comments
Bumping to add that we should do the same for DGMultiMesh(dg::DGMulti; cells_per_dimension,
coordinates_min=(-1.0, -1.0), coordinates_max=(1.0, 1.0),
is_on_boundary=nothing,
periodicity=ntuple(_ -> false, NDIMS)) but not for the DGMultiMesh(dg::DGMulti{NDIMS}, cells_per_dimension, mapping;
is_on_boundary=nothing,
periodicity=ntuple(_ -> false, NDIMS), kwargs...) where {NDIMS} |
Yes, it would definitely be great to unify these 👍 |
I agree, I also do not like that for |
So something I particularly dislike is the order of the coordinates and the argument that governs the discretization accuracy, i.e., |
It may be nice to unify the signatures of some mesh constructors or provide additional convenience constructors. This can be nice when testing different meshes, e.g., for #1191. Right now, we have
For example, it wold be nice to just replace
TreeMesh
byStructuredMesh
orP4estMesh
and get something that just works.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: