Consistent python wrapper function names#1978
Merged
pcarruscag merged 8 commits intodevelopfrom Mar 23, 2023
Merged
Conversation
pcarruscag
commented
Mar 21, 2023
WallyMaier
approved these changes
Mar 23, 2023
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I've tried to follow some convention for naming the functions. We were using "SetMarkerCustomXX" for CHT-type boundary conditions, so I extended that to other applications.
"Custom" means that the values set this way act as boundary conditions. Whereas the other accessors allow manipulating the state (e.g. for initialization) but do not change the final solution.
I also tried to disambiguate the terms for Flow loads of the flow solver vs FEA solver and mesh deformation.