You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi @jorgensd, thanks for the huge work done for the FEniCSx. As one of the many users of FEniCS/FEniCSx, I really think at least two points of FEniCSx are attracting: (1) convenience for solving PDEs and (2) the high computational efficiency based on parallel computation. I think the first point is already well illustrated in this tutorial. However, it would be better to illustrate the computational efficiency of FEniCSx versus other software such as Matlab.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This is out of the scope of the tutorials. As the tutorials are hosted on binderhub, I cannot access enough processes to illustrate performance.
additionally, comparing to other software is an «infinite» task. There are a large variety of FEM software out there, written in Fortran, C++, C, Matlab, Julia etc. A tutorial cannot cover all of them, especially as many FEM software are designed in a fundamentally different way.
Hi @jorgensd, thanks for the huge work done for the FEniCSx. As one of the many users of FEniCS/FEniCSx, I really think at least two points of FEniCSx are attracting: (1) convenience for solving PDEs and (2) the high computational efficiency based on parallel computation. I think the first point is already well illustrated in this tutorial. However, it would be better to illustrate the computational efficiency of FEniCSx versus other software such as Matlab.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: