RE: [Freepooma-devel] [PATCH] Canonicalize handling ofexternal/internal guards

[Julian C. Cummings]

 Hi Richard,

> The initial question was, if the user specifies one internal 
> guard layer, but only one patch ends up being used, is it 
> "correct" for the layouts
> internalGuards() method to return that there are _no_ 
> internal guard layers (apart from the issue, that, of course, 
> there will never be internal guard layers in a one-patch 
> setup).  It sort of violates the principle of least surprise 
> - likewise, if the grid domain is empty, we do not honour 
> requests for external guards (though that may be to avoid 
> corner cases).  I choose to not change this behavior in the end.
> 
> Richard.

Why don't you just tell the user when they specify one internal guard layer
that since there is only one Field patch, there will be no internal guard
layers needed?  Then there would be no surprise.  This would be consistent
with how you are handling requests for external guards when there is an
empty Field domain.

Regards, Julian C.

Dr. Julian C. Cummings
Staff Scientist, CACR/Caltech
(626) 395-2543
address@hidden