[firedrake] solver options

[Cotter, Colin J]

Yes, LinearVariationalSolver still says "parameters".

--cjc
________________________________________
From: firedrake-bounces at imperial.ac.uk [firedrake-bounces at imperial.ac.uk] on behalf of Lawrence Mitchell [lawrence at duffch.at]
Sent: 04 July 2014 17:55
To: firedrake
Subject: Re: [firedrake] solver options

> On 4 Jul 2014, at 17:08, Colin Cotter <colin.cotter at imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>  We have been trying to use the shiny new option to specify a different matrix for the solver, but within LinearVariationalSolver. With this usage, it fails for us, probably because we are mispecifying the options. The following code tries to solve it first using the solve() command, then with LinearVariationalSolver.
> https://gist.github.com/colinjcotter/fd72f3a838ce46d0fe7d
> Please can you tell us what we are doing wrong?

I changed the keyword arg names in linearvariationalsolver (and the nonlinear equivalent) to be the same as solve. Hence you need to use solver_parameters=... In both cases. Sorry for the confusion. Is this wrong in the docs?

Lawrence
_______________________________________________
firedrake mailing list
firedrake at imperial.ac.uk
https://mailman.ic.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/firedrake
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3787 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ic.ac.uk/pipermail/firedrake/attachments/20140705/531fa627/attachment.bin>