Skip to content

Interpolate physically-mapped elements into VertexOnlyMesh #4213

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Apr 10, 2025
Merged

Interpolate physically-mapped elements into VertexOnlyMesh #4213

merged 6 commits into from
Apr 10, 2025

Conversation

pbrubeck
Copy link
Contributor

@pbrubeck pbrubeck commented Apr 8, 2025

Description

This PR enables interpolation of physically-mapped elements into a VertexOnlyMesh.

Depends on firedrakeproject/fiat#144

connorjward
connorjward requested changes Apr 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
connorjward
connorjward reviewed Apr 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@connorjward connorjward left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks. I'm quite happy with the code. The test looks a little convoluted but that isn't as important as the rest of the source.

connorjward
connorjward approved these changes Apr 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@connorjward connorjward left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM (but maybe get someone else to verify the maths)

rckirby
rckirby requested changes Apr 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@rckirby rckirby left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should remove the bit about cell sizes for broader discussion, as it's not needed for this PR.

connorjward
connorjward requested changes Apr 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
connorjward
connorjward previously approved these changes Apr 10, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@connorjward connorjward left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This now looks absolutely fine. If the FIAT one can get merged then this can too.

rckirby
rckirby previously approved these changes Apr 10, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@rckirby rckirby left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm happy to do this after we merge FIAT (which still needs a test)

@pbrubeck pbrubeck dismissed stale reviews from rckirby and connorjward via bc82efd April 10, 2025 10:33
@pbrubeck pbrubeck force-pushed the pbrubeck/zany-point-evaluation branch from fb4de34 to bc82efd Compare April 10, 2025 10:33
@pbrubeck pbrubeck force-pushed the pbrubeck/zany-point-evaluation branch from 91444df to d33efa9 Compare April 10, 2025 10:37
@pbrubeck pbrubeck enabled auto-merge (squash) April 10, 2025 10:39
rckirby
rckirby approved these changes Apr 10, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@rckirby rckirby left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM now.

@connorjward
Copy link
Contributor

Forcing through as only the broken link is holding this up (will fix later today)

@connorjward connorjward disabled auto-merge April 10, 2025 12:27
@connorjward connorjward merged commit 25958a5 into master Apr 10, 2025
8 of 9 checks passed
@connorjward connorjward deleted the pbrubeck/zany-point-evaluation branch April 10, 2025 12:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@rckirby rckirby rckirby approved these changes

@connorjward connorjward connorjward left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@pbrubeck @connorjward @rckirby