[Core] Clean up and refactor of AssignScalarFieldToEntitiesProcess and AssignScalarVariableToEntitiesProcess

[loumalouomega]

📝 Description

Some clean up and refactor of AssignScalarFieldToEntitiesProcess and AssignScalarVariableToEntitiesProcess

🆕 Changelog

• Clean up AssignScalarFieldToEntitiesProcess
• Clean up AssignScalarVariableToEntitiesProcess
• Update python interface
• Clean up python processes
• Clean up test

[loumalouomega]

Heloo @rubenzorrilla @roigcarlo

[roigcarlo]

Ok, but update the doc to reflect the new historical switch

[loumalouomega]

Ok, but update the doc to reflect the new historical switch

Those processes are not documented at all

[loumalouomega]

@roigcarlo Doc added

[roigcarlo]

@roigcarlo Doc added

Ok but next time, there was already a https://github.com/KratosMultiphysics/Kratos/blob/master/docs/pages/Kratos/Processes/Assign_Values/assign_scalar_variable_process.md which refereed to the entities generic process, just change the value. No need to duplicate, just to add the new option

[loumalouomega]

@roigcarlo Doc added

Ok but next time, there was already a master/docs/pages/Kratos/Processes/Assign_Values/assign_scalar_variable_process.md which refereed to the entities generic process, just change the value. No need to duplicate, just to add the new option

Those are different processes, take a look

[roigcarlo]

Nut sure to follow you.

The only difference is that the name of the .md is different and the fact that in the older version the entry point for master_salve is called AssignScalarVariableToConstraintsProcess and in your version is called AssignScalarVariableToMasterSlaveConstraintsProcess

[loumalouomega]

Nut sure to follow you.

The only difference is that the name of the .md is different and the fact that in the older version the entry point for master_salve is called AssignScalarVariableToConstraintsProcess and in your version is called AssignScalarVariableToMasterSlaveConstraintsProcess

Yes, the problem is that for legacy reasons we have some processes with duplicated functionalities

[roigcarlo]

Visible confusion ¿?

There is only one `AssignVariableToXXXXX process (for example, for nodes as they have historical values):

The entry point for that process is the file AssignScalarVariableToEntitiesProcess. This process internally calls different specialized version that should not be directly used by the user which are (and that's the reason they only appear as "entry points" in the dock page I linked):

if value is number:

• AssignScalarVariableToNodesProcess(self.model_part, params)
• AssignScalarVariableToConditionsProcess(self.model_part, params)
• AssignScalarVariableToElementsProcess(self.model_part, params)
• AssignScalarVariableToMasterSlaveConstraintsProcess(self.model_part, params)

if value is vector

• AssignScalarFieldToNodesProcess(self.model_part, params)
• AssignScalarFieldToConditionsProcess(self.model_part, params)
• AssignScalarFieldToElementsProcess(self.model_part, params)

There is no duplicity here, the only think that has changed is that now there is an additional json config that allows the AssignScalarVariableToEntitiesProcess to also be able to call

• AssignScalarVariableHistoricalToNodesProcess(self.model_part, params)
• AssignScalarFieldHistoricalToNodesProcess(self.model_part, params)

if the new switch you added is on.

Those new options and entry points is what I meant you to add in the doc.

[matekelemen]

@loumalouomega why did you adapt this process for MasterSlaveConstraints? Are you using the DataValueContainer of MasterSlaveConstraints somewhere?

I'm asking because neither MasterSlaveConstraint nor LinearMasterSlaveConstraint actually uses the DataValueContainer member MasterSlaveConstraint::mData, and I'm thinking about removing it because it's confusing.

[matekelemen]

Btw it seems to me that you could have used proxies for this PR.

[loumalouomega]

Btw it seems to me that you could have used proxies for this PR.

I didn't knwo about that

[loumalouomega]

@loumalouomega why did you adapt this process for MasterSlaveConstraints? Are you using the DataValueContainer of MasterSlaveConstraints somewhere?

I'm asking because neither MasterSlaveConstraint nor LinearMasterSlaveConstraint actually uses the DataValueContainer member MasterSlaveConstraint::mData, and I'm thinking about removing it because it's confusing.

To be consistent...

[loumalouomega]

@loumalouomega why did you adapt this process for MasterSlaveConstraints? Are you using the DataValueContainer of MasterSlaveConstraints somewhere?
I'm asking because neither MasterSlaveConstraint nor LinearMasterSlaveConstraint actually uses the DataValueContainer member MasterSlaveConstraint::mData, and I'm thinking about removing it because it's confusing.

To be consistent...

I am using it and it is used somewhere...