Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refactor: boundary conditions #998

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jul 13, 2022
Merged

Conversation

psakievich
Copy link
Contributor

@psakievich psakievich commented Jul 13, 2022

General refactor of the boundary conditions data structures.

  • Remove the root() and parent() data structures from the boundary conditions and move to smart pointers. See Refactor: Remove parent() and root() #997 for why this is being pursued.
  • Removing the BoundaryConditions class which is just a thin wrapper of std::vector and is required for construction in a lot of places but never really used for anything other than a std::vector
  • Making BC object construction follow more of a factory pattern

@psakievich psakievich self-assigned this Jul 13, 2022
@psakievich psakievich marked this pull request as ready for review July 13, 2022 14:19
@psakievich psakievich merged commit f9a0fb9 into master Jul 13, 2022
@psakievich psakievich deleted the refactor-boundary-conditions branch July 13, 2022 17:04
psakievich added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2022
This reverts commit f9a0fb9.
More testing required
psakievich added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2022
This reverts commit f9a0fb9.
More testing required
psakievich added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2022
psakievich added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 10, 2022
* Revert "Revert "Refactor: boundary conditions (#998)" (#1000)"

This reverts commit 259986e.

* Fix pointer syntax

* Remove unnecessary std::move
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants