gmsh-bug in WIN98/NT?
Andre Haufe
haufe at schnurzel.net
Mon Mar 26 18:41:17 CEST 2001
Hi Christophe,
> Hello,
>
> I've just loaded your sample mesh file and my version of gmsh correctly
> displays the 4 points in the mesh (that's all what should be displayed
> for line elements in the current version). What we already experienced
> in the OpenGL implementation on Windows is a bug which causes points to
> be displayed as single pixels (instead of 5x5 pixel rectangles). What
> happens when you simply display one of the examples in the tutorial? Do
> you see the points in this case?
no, it wouldn't display any points, if I try to switch the point
numbering on it crashes sometimes, but will eventually not display
any information.
>
> Yes, it's also one of the problems for us: the Windows version is still
> very new (we all have a Unix background, and we still discover Windows
> particularities quite often...), and exits too often without leaving a
> message (that's a bad Unix habit, where you always have the terminal
> window to see what happened, especially for syntax errors in the input
> files which cause the input data to become invalid). Nevertheless, all
> messages should be logged in a file called ".gmsh-errors". Is this file
> correctly created in your case?
It is created but but it does not contain the information what went
wrong.
I guess windows will just not flush the buffer before the application
crashes.
I now use the .geo-Format which works well so far. What are the
limitations
when I also put postprocessing informtion into this file according to
this
sample:
---snip---
/* CARAT Design-Output for Gmsh */
/* Characteristic Length */
mtr = 1.0 ;
cm = 0.01 ;
lz = mtr ;
Point( 1)={ .000000, .000000, .000000 ,lz} ;
Point( 2)={ 1.000000, .000000, .000000 ,lz} ;
Point( 3)={ 1.000000, 1.000000, .000000 ,lz} ;
Point( 4)={ .000000, 1.000000, .000000 ,lz} ;
Point( 5)={ .000000, 1.000000, 1.000000 ,lz} ;
Point( 6)={ 1.000000, 1.000000, 1.000000 ,lz} ;
Line( 1)={ 1, 2 } ;
Line( 2)={ 2, 3 } ;
Line( 3)={ 3, 4 } ;
Line( 4)={ 4, 1 } ;
Line( 5)={ 4, 5 } ;
Line( 6)={ 5, 6 } ;
Line( 7)={ 6, 3 } ;
Line Loop( 8)={ 1, 2, 3, 4 } ;
Plane Surface( 9)={ 8 } ;
Line Loop( 10)={ 3, 5, 6, 7 } ;
Plane Surface( 11)={ 10 } ;
View "gagatest"
{
ST ( .000000, .000000, .000000, 1.000000, .000000,
.000000 , 1.000000, 1.000000, .000000 ) {1.0, 2.0, 0.5} ;
ST ( 0.000000, .000000, .000000 , 1.000000, 1.000000,
.000000 , .000000, 1.000000, .000000) {2.0, 0.5, 4} ;
SP ( 1.000000, .000000, .000000 ) {2} ;
SP ( 1.000000, 1.000000, .000000 ) {3} ;
SP ( .000000, 1.000000, .000000 ) {3} ;
SP ( .000000, 1.000000, 1.000000 ) {4} ;
SP ( 1.000000, 1.000000, 1.000000 ) {1} ;
} ;
---snip---
Is it just slow? Or why should I use the Post-Processing format?
Thanks!
Andre
>
> --
> Christophe Geuzaine
>
> Tel: 32 (0) 4 366 37 10 http://geuz.org
> Fax: 32 (0) 4 366 29 10 mailto:Christophe.Geuzaine at ulg.ac.be
--
================================
Andre Haufe
Visiting Scholar at the
Department of Civil Engineering
University of Calgary
2500 University Drive N.W.
Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4
CANADA
http://www.ucalgary.ca
haufe at schnurzel.net
http://www.schnurzel.net
================================