CFD Online Discussion Forums

CFD Online Discussion Forums (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/)
-   OpenFOAM Programming & Development (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/openfoam-programming-development/)
-   -   Python bindings and OpenFOAM-1.5-dev (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/openfoam-programming-development/66066-python-bindings-openfoam-1-5-dev.html)

francois July 4, 2009 09:35

Python bindings and OpenFOAM-1.5-dev
 
Hi all,

Any news on the python bindings for the library (to the level of physics solvers) on the OpenFOAM-1.5-dev branch ?

It could be an awesome feature/enhancement for users and for teaching purpose regarding the readability and easiness of python.

Thanks
Have a nice day.

francois February 5, 2010 16:24

up ...
Thanks

bastil February 5, 2010 17:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by francois (Post 245147)
up ...
Thanks

What does this mean? Is this feature available? I am also very interested in this. Thanks.

Regards

egp February 6, 2010 07:40

Hrv Jasak has shown some examples/demonstrations where OpenFOAM libraries have been wrapped in SWIG. OF objects can then be loaded from a python shell or script. With ipython/scipy/numpy/OpenFOAMpy, you would have a very cool and powerful tool.

Since we haven't heard anything about it here no the forum, my guess is that it is still in the experimental stage.

hjasak February 7, 2010 05:40

First, credit to Ivor who did a ton of work on this - much appreciated.

This is actually ready for release, but the delay is due to other related things that should go in. The biggest being, of course the Windows port, CMake and a set of new features.

I know the release of all the lovely new features is now disgracefully late (my fault), but (if it makes you feel better) this is now Priority #1 on my desk. I will keep you posted - python bindings are definitely ready.

If you wish to have a go, there is an experimental repository somewhere about...

Hrv

philippose February 7, 2010 06:42

Hello Hrv,

A Good Morning to you! Nice to see you active on the forum again :-)!

Your last post on this thread has made me very curious.... does this imply, that a native Windows port of OpenFOAM-1.xx-dev is basically almost ready for use?

This would be very exciting news for a lot of people including me :-)!

As usual.... if you would like someone to test-ride the port, I would be glad to offer my help!

Have a nice Sunday!

Philippose

francois February 9, 2010 11:32

Thanks Hrv.

That's a excellent news.

Congratulations to you and Ivor for your awesome works !
Francois

Niklas2 February 10, 2010 17:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by hjasak (Post 245237)
First, credit to Ivor who did a ton of work on this - much appreciated.
...
If you wish to have a go, there is an experimental repository somewhere about...

Hrv

Is the experimental repository about the python bindings or about the windows port?
I can't seem to find python bindings in any openfoam-extend branches (only pyfoam).
Can somebody help to find them "somewhere"?

Thanks
Niklas

hjasak February 11, 2010 19:48

Python. The Windows work is still restricted.

Niklas2 February 13, 2010 10:18

I understand. The python work is so amazing that their download location is kept secret.
Maybe www.fenics.org is the better choice.

Greetingz
Niklas

hjasak February 13, 2010 13:56

Cocky boy... but mis-directed.

Yes, I think the python work is amazing and it will have an impact to my work similar to a rutting rhinoceros :) The work has been going on for more than 2 years now, and I have shown some of it at the Workshop in Milan.

Now, to problems: there is at least 4 people who need to claim credit for this work (including myself). Some of them work for companies which invest heavily into their FOAM capability and it is necessary to encourage them in the best possible way to release the results of their effort (in their own time and their own way). At the end of the day, these people are being paid real money to do this work.

Furthermore, this needs to be done Right: if the release is half-baked or not easy to use, people will just say "garbage" and never look at it again. I wouldn't want that to happen - it would be unfair to us all.

So, while I understand your eagerness and enthusiasm, please allow some leeway for the release to be agreed upon and the details to be worked out properly. In the meantime, you can always try to do your own...

Good weekend,

Hrv

alberto March 29, 2010 16:41

Great news. But what is the logic behind choosing cmake? Will it replace wmake?

kev4573 March 30, 2010 13:19

CMake really is a great build system - helps a lot doing cross-compiles (hence the name). That would be my guess.

alberto March 30, 2010 15:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by kev4573 (Post 252349)
CMake really is a great build system - helps a lot doing cross-compiles (hence the name). That would be my guess.

Well, yes. But cmake can be a pain too :D

I was asking if it will live side by side with wmake, or replace it, because wmake is actually what I think makes OF easy to manage also for unexperienced users.

Best,

kev4573 March 30, 2010 17:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by alberto (Post 252364)
Well, yes. But cmake can be a pain too :D

Best,

Hehe, agreed. However, it would be incredibly useful to be able to do development in a real IDE like Eclipse though, so I definitely endorse a switch to cmake.

alberto March 30, 2010 17:17

You can use Eclipse with wmake too. I do that :-)

kev4573 March 31, 2010 16:20

Well that's cool - I'd be interested to hear how you got that setup. As far as I know eclipse has no plugin support for wmake, so I would guess it was a custom setup. This thread is probably not the right place to discuss this at length, but I'd be interested if you started a thread somewhere on how to get this setup, or can otherwise point me in the right direction. My arguement for cmake is really that it already has targets for many IDEs, and once you're working in a real IDE, I've found it is much easier to learn a code base and develop new code.

alberto March 31, 2010 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by kev4573 (Post 252591)
Well that's cool - I'd be interested to hear how you got that setup. As far as I know eclipse has no plugin support for wmake, so I would guess it was a custom setup. This thread is probably not the right place to discuss this at length, but I'd be interested if you started a thread somewhere on how to get this setup, or can otherwise point me in the right direction. My arguement for cmake is really that it already has targets for many IDEs, and once you're working in a real IDE, I've found it is much easier to learn a code base and develop new code.

You still have to build your "files" and "options" files by hand in my setup, but you can take advantage of Eclipse editor, code completion, warning/errors, ...

In short, the steps (Credit goes to Holger Marschall, errors are mine, since I'm summarizing :D) are:
  • Import your project (point to the solver top directory when in Files -> New -> C++ project, remove the check from "Use default location").
  • Edit the compiler properties so that under C/C++ build you replace the default build command with wmake. Deselect "Generate makefiles automatically" and set the build directory.
  • Deactivate Project -> Automatically build
  • Use "Make target" tab to add two targets, one for wmake and the other for wclean, pointing to the "Make" directory of your code.
Best,


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:47.