[Developers] remove dependency of NaNChecker from MoL

[Erik Schnetter]

On Dec 3, 2007, at 09:52:49, Thomas Radke wrote:

> Jian Tao wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Currently, MoL explicit requires NaNChecker. It is better to
>> remove the dependency of NaNChecker from MoL by using an alias
>> function.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> In the interface.ccl of MoL
>> ---------------------------
>> USES FUNCTION CheckVarsForNaN
>
> In order to keep runtime backwards compatibility MoL should REQUIRE
> FUNCTION CheckVarsForNaN.

Many people use MoL without the NaNChecker; if MoL requires the  
function, NaNChecker always needs to be present, even if it is not  
used.  That is inconvenient.  I would keep it as "uses" and add a run- 
time check depending on MoL's parameter settings.

> There is no convention about names for aliased functions but I suggest
> to prefix them with the name of the providing thorn/implementation.

That would require renaming the existing function, which we shouldn't  
do.  Do you have a suggestion for a good name?

>> In the interface.ccl of NaNChecker
>> ----------------------------------
>> PROVIDES FUNCTION CheckVarsForNaN WITH NaNChecker_CheckVarsForNaN
>> LANGUAGE C
>
> For completeness, NaNChecker should provide its full API via aliased
> functions.

I think there is only one other function, SetVarsToNaN.

-erik

-- 
Erik Schnetter <schnetter at cct.lsu.edu>

My email is as private as my paper mail.  I therefore support encrypting
and signing email messages.  Get my PGP key from www.keyserver.net.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://www.cactuscode.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20071203/1ea91def/attachment.bin