Peter Hill

An update on the current situation. The following are still in `Mesh`: - `addBoundary` - `readInts` - `smoothSeparatrix` - `sendToProc`, `receiveFromProc` - `UpXSplitIndex`, `DownXSplitIndex` - `sendYOutIndest`, `sendYOutOutdest`, `sendYInOutdest`, `sendYInIndest` -...

Some years later, the following are still in `Mesh`: - addBoundary - readInts - smoothSeparatrix - iterateBndryLowerOuterY - iterateBndryLowerInnerY - iterateBndryUpperOuterY - iterateBndryUpperInnerY

@bshanahan I don't see a `DDX(FieldPerp)`? At any rate, it's possible to check exactly which type the variant is holding at runtime, so it's possible to `throw` if the metric...

I think everything except PETSc should accept `_ROOT`, and that could be changed to accept `_ROOT` too, it's just PETSc is... well, PETSc. We'd probably check if `PETSC_ROOT` was set,...

If it doesn't have parallel slices, should it not just set the boundaries in the non-slice cells, i.e. don't use `yup/ydown`?

Oh, I do like the idea of a `forward` method. Especially if we can also reduce the scope of the tridiagonal coefficients.

Ouch, yes, good spot @johnomotani ! @bshanahan Non-uniform FFTs would definitely be nice, but we'd need to use a different library, as FFTW doesn't support them (at least, not to...

#2209 moves the output file ownership to the physics model, and also adds functionality to make it easier to write a Python dict to a BOUT++ dump file from the...

Thanks @alephpiece , this looks interesting! I've not used spack myself, but I know that it's widely used on clusters, supercomputers etc, so having a BOUT++ spack config would be...

Actually, I think the people at LLNL might have already done something with this -- @jonesholger is the spack stuff you've done specific to LLNL machines?