On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 16:04, Jim Wilson wrote:
> As it is now we need to test every
> single JSBSim aircraft every time a modification is made to flightgear
> because the trim routine is lacks robustness.
Sorry, but this is simply not true.
In this case it is a thing of an interface definition.
If you tell me that I can rely on /sim/presets, I *will* rely on them.
If I could not rely on these values, I ask myself why they are there. Or at
least why they are accessible to my FDM.
You just have to fulfill your own claims how this interface works.
Suggestion:
Create and give each FGInterface an own subdirectory of the property tree. An
FDM itself should then restrict its accesses to the property tree to values
inside this directory. This would
1. open the possibility of different FDM in the same flightgear instance.
2. make clear which properties are thought to be for this FDM.
For point 1 think of a fdm of our current aircraft and a net fdm's from a
different machine. You will then be able to see all aircraft full animated
just by including the whole property subtree in the net fdm.
Eric called some time ago not to use a leading / for animation properties. I
think that he is heading in this direction anyway. True, Eric?
For point 2 I would think that this subtree must look exactly the same if I
reset the simulation. Values outside need not meet this requirement.
This would just clearify what to expect and what is required to provide.
Greetings
Mathias
--
Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
