20,741
edits
Failure Manager: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Objective: bigstones' content monster strikes again ...
mNo edit summary |
m (→Objective: bigstones' content monster strikes again ...) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
|topic-fgdata= {{Git link|gitorious|fg/galvedros-fgdata|dev-failure-manager|pre=galvedros-fgdata/}} | |topic-fgdata= {{Git link|gitorious|fg/galvedros-fgdata|dev-failure-manager|pre=galvedros-fgdata/}} | ||
}} | |||
== Status (06/2014) == | |||
{{FGCquote | |||
|This is all looking very promising, but you guys should really be aware of galvedro's work, and flug's bombable addon - there certainly is quite some overlapping code in all 3 efforts here, and it would make sense to generalize and unify things so that code can be better reused. | |||
|{{cite web |url=http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=212173#p212173 | |||
|title=<nowiki>Re: Better nort crash</nowiki> | |||
|author=<nowiki>Hooray</nowiki> | |||
|date=<nowiki>Mon Jun 09</nowiki> | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
{{FGCquote | |||
|Once we start looking at combat hits, we'll almost certainly be comparing flug and dfaber's work on projectile hits so that our method of reporting submodel hits allows compatibility where possible. Tom has already built a method of seeing tracer from AI and MP models which also checks for collisions using submodels, so our next step is to address hit compatibility and how hits are passed over MP. | |||
|{{cite web |url=http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=212180#p212180 | |||
|title=<nowiki>Re: Better nort crash</nowiki> | |||
|author=<nowiki>Algernon</nowiki> | |||
|date=<nowiki>Mon Jun 09</nowiki> | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
{{FGCquote | |||
|as far as failures go, I am quite keen to find galvedro's code to find out how the failures system is changing - my intention all along has been to keep pace with FG's built in failures and adapt the damage system accordingly to make the best use of it. I'm looking through the repository at the moment but haven't yet found it. The damage system is intended to be a stage between hits and failures - failures may happen anyway, but failures are more likely to result where there is damage; to what extent will be handled between the damage script and the built in failure system. That said, I still think there will be room, a need even, for more detailed modelling of individual aircraft's particular characteristics - as an example, I've been looking at the failure probabilities for an EE Lightning, they will be significantly more prone to engine fires than the Victor! | |||
|{{cite web |url=http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=212180#p212180 | |||
|title=<nowiki>Re: Better nort crash</nowiki> | |||
|author=<nowiki>Algernon</nowiki> | |||
|date=<nowiki>Mon Jun 09</nowiki> | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
{{FGCquote | |||
|Since you are actually doing failure/damage/wear modeling, I am very interested in hearing your feedback about the new failure manager architecture and functionality.<br><br>I would suggest to read the wiki page Hooray posted first, as I tried to document the motivation for the change and the design principles there. The public interface for programming the failure manager from Nasal is at Nasal/FailureMgr/public.nas. It should be reasonably documented, but please let me know if you find something confusing or unclear.<br><br>On a side note, I don't recommend using the property tree interface directly for new developments, as it is currently half way between what it was and what I want it to be, so it is a bit dirty right now and it will change a bit in the future. | |||
|{{cite web |url=http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=212405#p212405 | |||
|title=<nowiki>Re: Better nort crash</nowiki> | |||
|author=<nowiki>galvedro</nowiki> | |||
|date=<nowiki>Thu Jun 12</nowiki> | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
{{FGCquote | |||
|Algernon: Great to see that you're actually interested in collaborating here and using existing code - it is very frustrating to see other efforts whose contributors don't realize how heavily their work is related, and how much it would make sense to team up with others to collaborate in a more framework-centric fashion, rather some aircraft-specific feature. We've recently seen several efforts with little to zero communication and collaboration, where contributors could have save months of work had they spoken up earlier and had they shown willingness to collaborate.<br><br>The added advantage here is that galvedro's code is a good foundation to work with, i.e. his code is exceptionally clean and he's obviously very familiar with coding, so a joint effort can be a mutually beneficial experience for all parties involved, and you'll save a ton of work and time along the way, while also ensuring that your work is generic, i.e. can be easily reused by other aircraft/developers. | |||
|{{cite web |url=http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=212417#p212417 | |||
|title=<nowiki>Re: Better nort crash</nowiki> | |||
|author=<nowiki>Hooray</nowiki> | |||
|date=<nowiki>Thu Jun 12</nowiki> | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
{{FGCquote | |||
|Regarding damage modeling WRT combat/bombable, I'd like to check flug's code at some point to see if/how certain parts of it could be generalized there - even just moving useful routines to a dedicated module in $FG_ROOT/Nasal or $FG_ROOT/Aircraft would be a good thing in my opinion. Flug has written some very clever Nasal code as part of the bombable addon, and we should really try to understand how to generalize and integrate the most useful parts so that people working on similar features can reuse his work.<br><br>EDIT: bombable.nas: [https://github.com/bhugh/Bombable/blob/master/Nasal/bombable.nas https://github.com/bhugh/Bombable/blob/ ... mbable.nas] | |||
|{{cite web |url=http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=212417#p212417 | |||
|title=<nowiki>Re: Better nort crash</nowiki> | |||
|author=<nowiki>Hooray</nowiki> | |||
|date=<nowiki>Thu Jun 12</nowiki> | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
{{FGCquote | |||
|We're definitely keen on using existing code where possible, I will admit that I need to look outside my own development sphere more as it's too tempting just to code something for hours, for fun, which is probably already extant somewhere! I believe galvedro has mentioned somewhere in a post he's interested in overhauling the Electrical.nas script - that is somewhere I'd be very interested to collaborate - battery drain and charge, AC and DC circuits, reasonably realistic load characteristics... that's something I'm excited about! I'm also always keen to get a firmer grip on Nasal, mine is still extremely basic and fairly inelegant. | |||
|{{cite web |url=http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=212442#p212442 | |||
|title=<nowiki>Re: Better nort crash</nowiki> | |||
|author=<nowiki>Algernon</nowiki> | |||
|date=<nowiki>Thu Jun 12</nowiki> | |||
}} | |||
}} | }} | ||