From 32ee41dc2abafd9a2a9a47434f4a9ef39a0d133c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Martin Kronbichler Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:27:11 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Fix a few typos in step-69 --- examples/step-69/doc/intro.dox | 6 +++--- examples/step-69/step-69.cc | 8 ++++---- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/examples/step-69/doc/intro.dox b/examples/step-69/doc/intro.dox index 4659c8895b..734aef04bf 100644 --- a/examples/step-69/doc/intro.dox +++ b/examples/step-69/doc/intro.dox @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ shockless regime and similarly benign situations. However, in the transonic and supersonic regime, and shock-hydrodynamics applications the use of variational schemes might be questionable. In fact, at the time of this writing, most shock-hydrodynamics codes are still -firmly grounded on finite volumes methods. The main reason for failure of +firmly grounded on finite volume methods. The main reason for failure of variational schemes in such extreme regimes is the lack of pointwise stability. This stems from the fact that a priori bounds on integrated quantities (e.g. integrals of moments) have in general no @@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ works on any mesh, in any space dimension, and is theoretically guaranteed to always work, all the time, no exception. This illustrates that deal.II can be used far beyond the context of variational schemes in Hilbert spaces and that a large number of classes, modules and namespaces from deal.II can -be adapted for such purpose. +be adapted for such a purpose.

Description of the scheme

@@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ application of this kind of schemes, also called edge-based or graph-based finite element schemes (see for instance @cite Rainald2008 for a historical overview). However, it is important to highlight that the algebraic structure of the scheme (presented in this -tutorial) and the node-loops are not just performance gimmick. Actually, the +tutorial) and the node-loops are not just a performance gimmick. Actually, the structure of this scheme was born out of theoretical necessity: the proof of pointwise stability of the scheme hinges on the specific algebraic structure of the scheme. In addition, it is not possible to compute the algebraic diff --git a/examples/step-69/step-69.cc b/examples/step-69/step-69.cc index 6d07c5a500..d97a0307d8 100644 --- a/examples/step-69/step-69.cc +++ b/examples/step-69/step-69.cc @@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ namespace Step69 // initialize everything that does not depend on parameters in the // constructor, and defer the creation of the mesh to the // setup() method that can be called once all parameters are - // read-in via ParameterAcceptor::initialize(). + // read in via ParameterAcceptor::initialize(). template class Discretization : public ParameterAcceptor { @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ namespace Step69 // members of OfflineData have well-defined values // independent of the current time step. This means that they can be // initialized ahead of time (at time step zero) and are not meant - // to be modified at any other later time step. For instance, the + // to be modified at any later time step. For instance, the // sparsity pattern should not change as we advance in time (we are not // doing any form of adaptivity in space). Similarly, the entries of the // lumped mass matrix should not be modified as we advance in time @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ namespace Step69 // contains a map from a global index of type types::global_dof_index of // a boundary degree of freedom to a tuple consisting of a normal vector, // the boundary id, and the position associated with the degree of - // freedom. We actually have to compute and store this geometric + // freedom. We have to compute and store this geometric // information in this class because we won't have access to geometric // (or cell-based) information later on in the algebraic loops over the // sparsity pattern. @@ -1505,7 +1505,7 @@ namespace Step69 // guess for an upper bound on the maximum wavespeed. More precisely, // equations (2.11) (3.7), (3.8) and (4.3) of @cite GuermondPopov2016b // are enough to define a guaranteed upper bound on the maximum - // wavespeed. This estimate is returned by the a call to the function + // wavespeed. This estimate is returned by a call to the function // lambda_max_two_rarefaction(). At its core the // construction of such an upper bound uses the so-called two-rarefaction // approximation for the intermediate pressure $p^*$, see for instance -- 2.39.5