Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Actually, why not
from sfepy import Mesh
?
Original comment by ondrej.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 12:32
sfepy is not just FE-engine - it has other stuff (solvers, applications, ...) I
would
not mix all together.
Original comment by robert.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 12:43
I still think it's better for all useful classes to be directly in sfepy.
Original comment by ondrej.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 12:47
On the other hand, now I know easily from which file the function comes from.
Well,
the directory structure is likely to change anyway in the process of splitting
"engine" and "front-end" code. This can wait.
Original comment by robert.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 12:52
Well, in fact, you don't know exactly, as you made a mistake on IRC. So this
seems to
support my idea and also the Zen of Python:
Flat is better than nested.
Original comment by ondrej.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 1:15
There is a counter-saying: Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do
more of
those!
I tried (wrongly) sfepy.fem which would be ok.
Original comment by robert.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 1:19
You didn't convince me. :) But imho we have more important stuff to do now and
either
way is fine with me and it's trivial to fix it.
Original comment by ondrej.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 1:33
You got it ;)
Original comment by robert.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 1:37
Done, see http://hg.sympy.org/sfepy/rev/7134e8c1eb0f
Original comment by robert.c...@gmail.com
on 1 Oct 2008 at 1:21
Original comment by robert.c...@gmail.com
on 1 Apr 2010 at 9:57
Migrated to http://github.com/sfepy/sfepy/issues/61
Original comment by robert.c...@gmail.com
on 30 Jan 2012 at 10:25
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
robert.c...@gmail.com
on 8 Sep 2008 at 11:52