-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 62
Operator Name Consistency #1875
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
Conversation
161723c to
4c633d2
Compare
|
Duh, forgot I could move some of the tests to dev only |
|
This seems like only a naming convention thing, and like it would be possible to preserve deprecated stubs for the old names. That would ease migration at what looks to be minimal cost. |
|
Yeah, preserving the stubs to the handful of old names would be easy. |
df74f3e to
ba68461
Compare
567ea5b to
b039254
Compare
b039254 to
52b0e56
Compare
|
Any objections to merging this now? I think its ready |
jrwrigh
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good by me.
We have
CeedBasisCreateH1and similar for almost all objects. I'm not sure why we treatCeedCompositeOperatorCreatedifferently?