From: Roy S. <ro...@st...> - 2008-06-20 13:53:41
|
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, John Peterson wrote: > Since you can call all of the routines and it will just drop the ones > it's not using, that's one way to go. On the PETSc side I wish it > could be cleaner...why have two totally separate function names > instead of just letting the arguments' types determine the behavior? It's been *that* long since you used C without the ++, huh? --- Roy |