Fix issue 353

[sandro-elsweijer]

Describe your changes here:
Closes #353
Based on PR #380

All these boxes must be checked by the reviewers before merging the pull request:

As a reviewer please read through all the code lines and make sure that the code is fully understood, bug free, well-documented and well-structured.

• The author added a BSD statement to doc/ (or already has one)

• The code compiles without warning in debugging and release mode, with and without MPI (this should be executed automatically in a github action)

  If the Pull request introduces code that is not covered by the github action (for example coupling with a new library):

  • Should this use case be added to the github action?
  • If not, does the specific use case compile and all tests pass (check manually)

• All tests pass (in various configurations, this should be executed automatically in a github action)

• New source/header files are properly added to the Makefiles

• New Datatypes are added to t8indent_custom_datatypes.txt

• The reviewer executed the new code features at least once and checked the results manually

• The code is covered in an existing or new test case

• New tests use the Google Test framework

• The code follows the t8code coding guidelines

• The code is well documented

• All function declarations, structs/classes and their members have a proper doxygen documentation

• All new algorithms and data structures are sufficiently optimal in terms of memory and runtime (If this should be merged, but there is still potential for optimization, create a new issue)

• If this PR introduces a new feature, it must be covered in an example/tutorial and a Wiki article.

[holke]

Sorry i messed up a bit and confused the 353 and 352 branches.
Had to do a force push on this branch to reset my mess.

[sandro-elsweijer]

This should also enable us to work on issue #399

[holke]

Looks good.
We currently do not have a test for this.
We do not have any test for reading a .msh file with .brep info i think?
So we should write one.
Minor change is that i dont think the string copying is really necessary and can be done via simple assignment.

[holke]

Converted to draft since #380 was reverted.

[holke]

@sandro-elsweijer can you please verify whether this is working now (especially on partitioned cmeshes)?
Since Lukas fixed the attribute bug in #444

[holke]

This is still marked as a draft.
@sandro-elsweijer can this be taken out of draft status?

[sandro-elsweijer]

This is still marked as a draft.
@sandro-elsweijer can this be taken out of draft status?

@holke No, since it depends on #470. But it is reviewable.