> as well as any other files containing subroutines. > call SomeSubroutine ( loc_p_v (loc_p_i +1) ) > call VecGetArray(loc_p, loc_p_v, loc_p_i, ierr) ![]() > call DMCreateLocalVector(da1dof, loc_p, ierr) > call DMCreateGlobalVector(da1dof, glob_p, ierr) > We have come across an issue which makes us wonder if we are handling the PETSc variables in the right way so it would be great if anyone of you could comment on the following code snippets: We are about to upgrade our code to make it compatible with PETSc 3.9 but that's another story. > I'm working with a code that uses PETSc (version 3.3). > On Jul 3, 2018, at 10:21 AM, Bastian Löhrer wrote: We recommend upgrading to VecGetArrayF90() the resulting code is a little easier to read. If you are using the default configuration it should not matter if you declare your scalar variables as double precision or PetscScalar you should get the same results. configure of PETSc has PetscScalar being double precision configure options can change it to single precision and or complex numbers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |