Relax assumption on BaseFormOperator's dual argument slot#283
Merged
Conversation
dham
approved these changes
Jul 17, 2024
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
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR relaxes the assumption on the type of the object that goes into the dual argument slot of
BaseFormOperators. Base form operators (e.g.ExternalOperatororInterpolate) of the formB: V -> V, orB: V x V* -> R, have an argument slot to represent their dual argument (the one in V*). Strictly speaking, whatever is in V* should be allowed to go in there. At the moment, the code assumes that only aCofunctionor aFormcan be held in this slot. This PR extends that assumption to other cases such asActionor evenBaseFormOperator.