-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 96
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
Timestepping #510
Timestepping #510
Conversation
@@ -163,7 +178,8 @@ def __init__(self,riemann_solver=None,claw_package=None): | |||
self._is_set_up = False | |||
self._use_old_bc_sig = False | |||
self.accept_step = False | |||
self.adjust_dt = False | |||
self.get_dt = False | |||
self.before_step = before_step |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe this should be initialized to None to avoid wasting time on needless function calls.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is now initialized to None.
- Avoid dublicating code for selection of dt. - SSP22 SSP104 methods and get_dt routine do not return any variables. - Rename dq_dt to self.dq_dt and avoid computing function evaluation if previous step is rejected. - Rename self.dq_dt to self.prev_dq_dt_values. - self.before_step is initialized to None. - Use self.dt_old to check if we are at the first step or not.
This looks good to me now. @mandli since this is an internal refactoring and doesn't change anything that the average user should touch, is it okay with you if we sneak it into 5.3.0? If you think it is better we can wait for 5.3.1. |
I think that's fine with me. I would say merge this. |
This is a short PR that improves the time-stepping procedure in pyclaw.
It includes the following: