Add Grid getter to FunctionSpace #264
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…ightly more complicated. Can't use name grid() since that conflicts with existing API for Structured and BlockStructuredColumns
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
See #260 for motivation.
I've used the name get_grid_copy(), since BlockStructuredColumns and StructuredColumns already have a grid() method and this would cause a conflict.
As suggested in the Issue, PointCloud stores a Grid if constructed with one. It returns this if it has it, otherwise it generates one using its own iterator. I've added a test case that checks both paths. Although the test is apparently run with MPI=2, the (nb_partitions_ == 1) branch in the added function is being used to generate the Grid because the PointCloud constructor that takes a vector of points does not set nb_partitions_. I've been using the code externally and the parallel branch is giving me correct results, but I think ideally this should be tested. Not sure how to resolve. Should that constructor have a nb_partitions_ = comm.size() statement?