Update comments for some DGSEM APIs

[huiyuxie]

The original comments for these deprecated DGSEM are quite confusing.

[github-actions]

Review checklist

This checklist is meant to assist creators of PRs (to let them know what reviewers will typically look for) and reviewers (to guide them in a structured review process). Items do not need to be checked explicitly for a PR to be eligible for merging.

Purpose and scope

• The PR has a single goal that is clear from the PR title and/or description.
• All code changes represent a single set of modifications that logically belong together.
• No more than 500 lines of code are changed or there is no obvious way to split the PR into multiple PRs.

Code quality

• The code can be understood easily.
• Newly introduced names for variables etc. are self-descriptive and consistent with existing naming conventions.
• There are no redundancies that can be removed by simple modularization/refactoring.
• There are no leftover debug statements or commented code sections.
• The code adheres to our conventions and style guide, and to the Julia guidelines.

Documentation

• New functions and types are documented with a docstring or top-level comment.
• Relevant publications are referenced in docstrings (see example for formatting).
• Inline comments are used to document longer or unusual code sections.
• Comments describe intent ("why?") and not just functionality ("what?").
• If the PR introduces a significant change or new feature, it is documented in NEWS.md with its PR number.

Testing

• The PR passes all tests.
• New or modified lines of code are covered by tests.
• New or modified tests run in less then 10 seconds.

Performance

• There are no type instabilities or memory allocations in performance-critical parts.
• If the PR intent is to improve performance, before/after time measurements are posted in the PR.

Verification

• The correctness of the code was verified using appropriate tests.
• If new equations/methods are added, a convergence test has been run and the results
  are posted in the PR.

Created with ❤️ by the Trixi.jl community.

[huiyuxie]

Trixi.jl/src/solvers/dgsem/dgsem.jl

Lines 54 to 57 in 9893b73

	function DGSEM(polydeg, surface_flux = flux_central,
	volume_integral = VolumeIntegralWeakForm())
	DGSEM(Float64, polydeg, surface_flux, volume_integral)
	end

I guess this is also deprecated. Should I add a comment for it or just remove it?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.42%. Comparing base (9893b73) to head (00ec2ac).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2238   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.42%   96.42%           
=======================================
  Files         487      487           
  Lines       39355    39355           
=======================================
  Hits        37945    37945           
  Misses       1410     1410           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	96.42% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[sloede]

Trixi.jl/src/solvers/dgsem/dgsem.jl

Lines 54 to 57 in 9893b73

	function DGSEM(polydeg, surface_flux = flux_central,
	volume_integral = VolumeIntegralWeakForm())
	DGSEM(Float64, polydeg, surface_flux, volume_integral)
	end

I guess this is also deprecated. Should I add a comment for it or just remove it?

A comment would be good. Since it is part of the API, we cannot just remove it without creating a breaking release.

[ranocha]

Thanks