... | ... | @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ The idea of such an architecture rised when we noticed that the `ApplicationExam |
|
|
|
|
|
## What Sven observes every ExaHyPE Application has
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Inflation of plotters
|
|
|
We notice a big number of generic *plotters*. They are typically:
|
|
|
|
|
|
* `Plotter0`: The plain output quantities: `outputQuantities = Q;`, ie the _conserved_ variables.
|
... | ... | @@ -13,3 +14,8 @@ We notice a big number of generic *plotters*. They are typically: |
|
|
* `Plotter4`: The pointwise difference between the evolved and exact quantities, ie. `outputQuantities = Q - exactSolution(x,t)`.
|
|
|
* `Plotter5`: The relative pointwise differente between evolved and exact quantities, ie. `outputQuantities = (Q - exactSolution(x,t)) / exactSolution(x,t)`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I stick to this fixed, but arbitrary numbering scheme amongst the applications but apparently it is quite unflexible at is it not possible to disable `Plotter3` without changing the overall numbering. We should move from numeric plotter labeling to actual labels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Queried initial data
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accessing user specified constants in the spec file still does not work correctly, so there is a number of patch code which can access the environment variables instead. In all applications we have multiple initial data examples for a given PDE. This will always remain as we will always have lot's of sources for initial data. |
|
|
\ No newline at end of file |