From: Krishnakumar Gopalakrishnan Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2020 17:01:45 +0000 (+0000) Subject: In the doc for KellyErrorEstimator class, trying to fix doxygen links to couple of... X-Git-Tag: v9.2.0-rc1~695^2 X-Git-Url: https://gitweb.dealii.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=e4a3f42c86846707574652b175c7c9f7b6ee2f90;p=dealii.git In the doc for KellyErrorEstimator class, trying to fix doxygen links to couple of functions in the GridRefinement namespace fixes a typo (gradiend) in the documentation of KellyErrorEstimator class Update include/deal.II/numerics/error_estimator.h Co-Authored-By: Timo Heister Update include/deal.II/numerics/error_estimator.h Co-Authored-By: Timo Heister trying to reindent the pull request --- diff --git a/include/deal.II/numerics/error_estimator.h b/include/deal.II/numerics/error_estimator.h index 485b7bd526..d52b077e03 100644 --- a/include/deal.II/numerics/error_estimator.h +++ b/include/deal.II/numerics/error_estimator.h @@ -74,10 +74,10 @@ namespace hp * the conormal derivative $a\frac{du}{dn} = g$. * * The error estimator returns a vector of estimated errors per cell which can - * be used to feed the GridRefinement::refine_fixed_fraction, - * GridRefinement::refine_fixed_number, and similar functions. This vector - * contains elements of data type @p float, rather than @p double, since - * accuracy is not important in the current context. + * be used to feed the GridRefinement::refine_and_coarsen_fixed_fraction(), + * GridRefinement::refine_and_coarsen_fixed_number(), and similar functions. + * This vector contains elements of data type @p float, rather than @p double, + * since accuracy is not important in the current context. * * The full reference for the paper in which this error estimator is defined * is as follows: @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ namespace hp *

Boundary values

* * If the face is at the boundary, i.e. there is no neighboring cell to which - * the jump in the gradiend could be computed, there are two possibilities: + * the jump in the gradient could be computed, there are two possibilities: *
    *
  • The face belongs to a Dirichlet boundary. Then the face is not * considered, which can be justified looking at a dual problem technique and