weiliangjin2021
weiliangjin2021
Check boundary condition before throwing "structure bounds that extend exactly at boundares" warning
> @weiliangjin2021 for periodic/Bloch is it still needed to extend structures to get the right update coefficients? I think you now handle periodicity correctly in preprocessing so it should not...
> One thing is that we should choose the class names carefully. Specifically, > > ``` > BenklerSubpixel > HeuristicSubpixel > ``` > > are both not clear from the...
One more question on names: is it necessary for each of them ending in`Subpixel`? `StaircasingSubpixel` and `ConformalSubpixel` sounds strange, because the two words in the former are contradictory; while the...
Still haven't figured out a good name for dielectric subpixel averaging, so it remains as boolean for now. Docstrings have been updated. Now the new API looks like this ```...
> hm, try running this script? https://github.com/flexcompute/tidy3d/blob/pre/2.7/scripts/sample.py Thanks, that fixes it.
Sorry another question @tylerflex: it seems that allowing a simulation field to be the union of a basic type (e.g. bool in `subpixel` and float in `run_time`) and a class...
> > Sorry another question @tylerflex: it seems that allowing a simulation field to be the union of a basic type (e.g. bool in `subpixel` and float in `run_time`) and...
> looks good to me! just one thing: would it make sense to rename `MetalConformal` to `PECConformal` since it goes into `pec: ` but not `metal: ` field? We plan...
> > looks good to me! just one thing: would it make sense to rename `MetalConformal` to `PECConformal` since it goes into `pec: ` but not `metal: ` field? >...
> * are we eventually going to have a `good_conductor` kind of field in `SubpixelSpec` too, and how is that going to interact with `metal`? In the 1st release, we...