Benjamin Uekermann
Benjamin Uekermann
My gut feeling is that "smaller functions" should be easier to read. But let's anyway first do the missing refactoring steps in #633 before concluding here.
I do not see a real use case yet. What we should do however, is to properly document this.
See https://github.com/precice/precice.github.io/pull/257#discussion_r1404274813 I am not sure that this is a real use case.
But we should still get an error message here and no segfault. So, problem solved, but not issue solved.
The wrong config looks like this:  So, obviously bogus, but nothing clearly forbidden. I don't see right now where this should fail without debugging the case.
No, should not be related to extrapolation.
Alternatively, we could also forbid the combination 2LI + global RBF. There should be no use case, right?
> @MakisH https://github.com/CodyGirl/precice/network/dependencies?page=2 > Last 4 are the ones which were mentioned in the packages.config file. Could we make those link to their repositories? At least those that are on...
No, we haven't done anything in this direction. An auxiliary mesh is probably the best solution for the moment. On Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 10:33 PM Dominanz wrote: > I...
> But your idea is better as we couple them once instead of in each coupling time step. To avoid misunderstandings: this feature would still communicate the global data in...