support adding Dirichlet BCs to nodesets #346
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I think this looks good, just some weird spaces/tabs in the code that made line be misaligned. I think it is ok to warn (rather than give an error) if an user adds constraints to a faceset/nodeset that is not included in the given FieldHandler. |
|
Weird that line doesn't look misaligned at all in my editor. |
|
🎉 |
You probably have the tab-width set to 4. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Allow to add Dirichlet BCs to nodesets for the
MixedDofHandler.Also allows to add boundary conditions to a
FieldHandlereven if not all nodes/faces are part of the corresponding cellset. In that case a warning will be given and the node/face will simply be skipped. Considering that most mesh generators give nodesets in the format of "left nodes" and not seperated according to quad/tri/etc. elements, I think this is a lot more convenient.@lijas : Now I did mess with functions that you are touching in #343, but it is small changes.
This replaces #294.