Skip to content
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

use FEPE::get_normal_vector() to be consistent with FEE #15304

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 8, 2023

Conversation

jh66637
Copy link
Contributor

@jh66637 jh66637 commented Jun 5, 2023

As discussed in #15302 I am renaming FEPE::get_normal_vector() to be consistent with FEE

@bergbauer @kronbichler

Copy link
Member

@peterrum peterrum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are there no tests?

@jh66637
Copy link
Contributor Author

jh66637 commented Jun 5, 2023

I didn't find one. Let's wait if the pipeline fails, but I am pretty confident :)

@kronbichler
Copy link
Member

Given #15302, we should wait to see what the consensus is on the general names.

@jh66637
Copy link
Contributor Author

jh66637 commented Jun 6, 2023

As discussed in #15302 I early-deprecated get_normal_vector() in favor of normal_vector(). To ensure user code does not break, I copied a test which uses get_normal_vector(). This test can be removed when get_normal_vector() is eventually completely removed.

@bangerth @kronbichler @peterrum @bergbauer

Copy link
Member

@kronbichler kronbichler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree. However, can we wait with marking it as early deprecation until after the release? My point is that we will have a release in a few weeks, so deprecation warnings start essentially immediately for someone working with master. Since this is an interface used in many places, I would prefer to delay the cycle by one year. This means the feature will get deprecated in summer 2024 and removed in 2025, which is more feasible than 2023 and 2024 in my opinion.

@kronbichler
Copy link
Member

And by the way, thank you for the effort, it seems you found all cases I could think about.

@jh66637
Copy link
Contributor Author

jh66637 commented Jun 6, 2023

@kronbichler I removed the deprecation attribute but kept the rest as is. We can keep #15302 open, so we don't forget to add the attribute after the release.

@kronbichler
Copy link
Member

Any additional comments? If not, I suggest to merge this PR in a day or so.

@kronbichler kronbichler merged commit b617cbc into dealii:master Jun 8, 2023
14 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants