Re: fem-fenics questions

[c.]

On 3 Mar 2014, at 12:50, Daniel Kraft <address@hidden> wrote:

> I would probably go for this signature anyway -- it seems more intuitive
> to do "feval(func, x, y)" instead of "feval(func, [x, y])" since the
> former is closer to "func(x, y)".

the approach with multiple coordinates collected into a matrix is more 
convenient, 
for example, for computing the value of the function at all the nodes of a mesh 
using
the p field of the mesh structure.

> If it isn't a problem to make the old convention obsolete,

yes it is a problem, consistency with FEnics syntax is crucial.

c.