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

Created a component test for vtk writer and reader #1361

Open
wants to merge 25 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

tunxu
Copy link
Collaborator

@tunxu tunxu commented Jan 29, 2025

Describe your changes here:
Addition of a test that creates a vtk file from a cmesh, reads that file and compares the read file with the original cmesh

All these boxes must be checked by the reviewers before merging the pull request:

As a reviewer please read through all the code lines and make sure that the code is fully understood, bug free, well-documented and well-structured.

General

  • The reviewer executed the new code features at least once and checked the results manually

  • The code follows the t8code coding guidelines

  • New source/header files are properly added to the Makefiles

  • The code is well documented

  • All function declarations, structs/classes and their members have a proper doxygen documentation

  • All new algorithms and data structures are sufficiently optimal in terms of memory and runtime (If this should be merged, but there is still potential for optimization, create a new issue)

Tests

  • The code is covered in an existing or new test case using Google Test

Github action

  • The code compiles without warning in debugging and release mode, with and without MPI (this should be executed automatically in a github action)

  • All tests pass (in various configurations, this should be executed automatically in a github action)

    If the Pull request introduces code that is not covered by the github action (for example coupling with a new library):

    • Should this use case be added to the github action?
    • If not, does the specific use case compile and all tests pass (check manually)

Scripts and Wiki

  • If a new directory with source-files is added, it must be covered by the script/find_all_source_files.scp to check the indentation of these files.
  • If this PR introduces a new feature, it must be covered in an example/tutorial and a Wiki article.

License

  • The author added a BSD statement to doc/ (or already has one)

Tag Label

  • The author added the patch/minor/major label in accordance to semantic versioning.

@Davknapp Davknapp self-assigned this Jan 30, 2025
@sandro-elsweijer
Copy link
Collaborator

@Davknapp We had a call with @lukasdreyer about the negative volume check, since it resulted in massive problems. It was poorly implemented for 2D elements and we decided to remove the poor implementation and make the complete check optional. The reasoning is that we should not fiddle with the input data of the user unasked (like when we reorder nodes in an element with negative volume) and instead we provide the validate geometry function which can still be used for checking of negative volumes.

tunxu and others added 19 commits January 30, 2025 10:32
We declare an interface for the search functionality.
It is yet not implemented.
A new templated search class and search_with_queries class that
inherits from it.
Added the documentation of the search and search with query-class.
Also started to implement the constructor, destructor and some convenience-functions
wip, does not compile at the moment.
updated t8_gtest_search to use the new interface
c-interface is currently untested, will probably need some changes for the callbacks.
in the callback the function t8_forest_get_tree_class throws an assertion.
in the constructor of the test the same function is successfull.
pass forest explicitly
run with valgrind for more information
unref as destructor
when compiled with -pedantic reordering is forbidden
Copy link
Collaborator

@Davknapp Davknapp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you for your contribution! As you contribute to t8code for the first time, please add a BSD-statement.
Why are there changes in the p4est&sc submodules? If you need a specific version of these libraries please address this in a spereate PR.

*/
/* TODO: write a test for this function */
int
t8_cmesh_tree_vertices_negative_volume (const t8_eclass_t eclass, const double *vertices, const int num_vertices);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think that we should remove this function entirely. Even though it is not used internally at the moment this still can be a handy function for others.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@Davknapp and I had a chat about that and it is fine that we removed it :)

{
/* Get the treea and their face neighbors */

t8_locidx_t *face_neighborsa, *face_neighborsb;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

please declare the variable at the point they are used, not at the top of the functions. I know, in these files a lot of functions declare the variables at the top, but changed our coding guidelines. These functions are not up to date and might be changed in the future to the current guidelines.

{
int is_equal;
t8_locidx_t num_trees, num_ghost, itree, ighost;
t8_locidx_t num_trees, num_ghost, ighost;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

please declare the variables at the point where they are used.

t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_write);
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_2 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_read);
ASSERT_EQ (num_trees_cmesh_1, num_trees_cmesh_2);
EXPECT_TRUE (t8_cmesh_is_equal_ext (unpartitioned_cmesh_write, unpartitioned_cmesh_read, 0));
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you transform this into a Makro EXPECT_CMESH_EQ ?

t8_cmesh_commit (unpartitioned_cmesh_read, sc_MPI_COMM_WORLD);

/* check equality of repartioned cmeshes */
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_write);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_write);
const t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_write);


/* check equality of repartioned cmeshes */
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_write);
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_2 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_read);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_2 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_read);
const t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_2 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (unpartitioned_cmesh_read);

t8_cmesh_unref (&unpartitioned_cmesh_write);
}
else { /* continue normally without repartitioning */
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (cmesh);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (cmesh);
const t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (cmesh);

}
else { /* continue normally without repartitioning */
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_1 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (cmesh);
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_2 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (cmesh2);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_2 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (cmesh2);
const t8_gloidx_t num_trees_cmesh_2 = t8_cmesh_get_num_trees (cmesh2);

@Davknapp Davknapp assigned tunxu and unassigned Davknapp Jan 30, 2025
@tunxu tunxu force-pushed the feature-vtk_meshreader branch from af47744 to f29be47 Compare January 31, 2025 06:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants