Support for Dirac delta defined by tags

[principejavier]

I implemented support for Dirac deltas, similar to the one in Gridap.jl but restricted to the definition by tags. The definition at arbitrary points will require a parallel search as observed by @JordiManyer in this issue. Although for few points that would not be a problem using tags is enough to have point loads. I also added some tests.

In particular, please, have a look to the definition of this function. Should it be moved to Gridap.jl?

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #133 (fa3584e) into master (50184f2) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #133   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage    0.00%   0.00%           
======================================
  Files          12      12           
  Lines        2448    2478   +30     
======================================
- Misses       2448    2478   +30     

Files	Coverage Δ
src/CellData.jl	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[fverdugo]

It looks good to me.

[JordiManyer]

Hi @principejavier , sorry for the delay... I agree the mentioned code for BoundaryTriangulation is repeated quite a lot. The underlying issue is that although BoundaryTriangulation is defined in general, there are no constructors for arbitrary facet dimension. All constructors end up defaulting to D=Dc-1... I have had to implement this same constructor a couple of times already.
So I do think it would be good to have something like this in Gridap.
@amartinhuertas do you agree?

[principejavier]

@JordiManyer , @amartinhuertas , if you don't mind I will accept this PR to incorporate the development into master and I will open an issue to keep in mind #133 (comment)

[JordiManyer]

@JordiManyer , @amartinhuertas , if you don't mind I will accept this PR to incorporate the development into master and I will open an issue to keep in mind #133 (comment)

Yeah all good!