[Gmsh] Gmsh file format version 2.0/2.1 confusions as saved by Save As...?

[Fabio Sacconi]

Hi,
I  think  this  is a  little  bug:
since  the  mesh  format  is  changed  from  previous  versions,  even  
if   the  change  is just   the  dimension info  in $PhysicalNames, I  
think  it  would  be  better  to change   the  MeshFormat in  the  .msh  
file  too,  to  2.1.
This  would  help  a  lot  in  the  parsing  of  the  mesh  file  for  
reading  into  an  external  code.

Thank  you in  advance.

Bye

Fabio






 

> Hi,
>
> When I do with versions 2.4.2 and 2.4.3-svn as of today
>
> 1. start gmsh, load any .geo file, create mesh
> 2. File -> Save As..
> 3. choose Gmsh mesh (*.msh), enter file name, OK
> 4. choose Version 2.0 ASCII, OK
>
> Then the created .msh file does have the version 2.0 identifier in the
> $MeshFormat section but has extra dimension information that should be
> a new extension in 2.1 format in the $PhysicalNames section
>
> $MeshFormat
> 2 0 8
> $EndMeshFormat
> $PhysicalNames
> 2
> 2 1 "Surfaces"
> 3 2 "Volume"
> $EndPhysicalNames
>
> . Furthermore, if I choose Version 2.0 Binary instead, gmsh writes
>
> $MeshFormat
> 2.1 0 8
> $EndMeshFormat
> $PhysicalNames
> 2
> 2 1 "Surfaces"
> 3 2 "Volume"
> $EndPhysicalNames
>
> which seems valid this time, but contradicts with the "Version 2.0"
> menu item description.
>
> I see the behavior not only with the .geo files but with imported mesh
> files (at least) in MED format. Is this intended?
>
> Thanks,
> Takuya
>
> Takuya OSHIMA, Ph.D.
> Faculty of Engineering, Niigata University
> 8050 Ikarashi-Ninocho, Nishi-ku, Niigata, 950-2181, JAPAN
>
> _______________________________________________
> gmsh mailing list
> gmsh at geuz.org
> http://www.geuz.org/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
>
>   


-- 
Ing. Fabio Sacconi
Dip. Ing. Elettronica
Universita' di Roma II - Tor Vergata
Via del Politecnico, 1 - 00133 Roma 
Tel. +39-06-72597781
Fax  +39-06-2020519
E-mail : sacconi at ing.uniroma2.it