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

Don't have dt as an argument to the physics evaluate methods #585

Open
tommbendall opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Don't have dt as an argument to the physics evaluate methods #585

tommbendall opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
tidying Involves tidying up code

Comments

@tommbendall
Copy link
Contributor

Some physics schemes need to know the time step (separately from the time discretisation).

In case the time step changes, we currently pass dt into every evaluate method. It would be better to have physics.dt point to time_discretisation.dt, and set this in some set up method

@tommbendall tommbendall added the tidying Involves tidying up code label Dec 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
tidying Involves tidying up code
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant