Hi Henry, I just read your posts, and Im glad there are more people interested in developing CEL in this way. I would highly recommend looking at what is already implemented in cel/trunk/plugins/propclass/ specifically pathfinderfact.h/.cpp, steerfact.h/.cpp for pathfinding and steering or neuralnet.h/.cpp and evolve.h/.cpp for the evolutionary algorithms you previously mentioned your interest in.
If you have any specific suggestions regarding these projects please post them. I know we will be competing for places with regards to the GSoC application, but it will help both of us to discover what the community wants if discussion is fueled prior to applications. All the best with your proposal, Sam. > Hi! I'm fully interested on the first point, I posted a thread about AI > too, > I'm not sure if you read about it, my name is Henry. Anyway, I want to > work > on it, I think I can improve this implementation and add new features too. > I'm going to check this carefully this week. If you have any question or > comment please let me know. > > Henry > > 2009/3/31 <smd...@student.cs.york.ac.uk> > >> Thank you Scott that clarifies my queries and I can now appreciate why >> the >> vagueness of the 3rd project makes it unnacceptable. My concern now is >> that I find it hard to choose between the other two projects as I am >> very >> keen to pursue both. Is it acceptable to submit two proposals to crystal >> space? As I am happy to work on whichever is more desired by the CS >> community. Or should I try to gauge interest on this thread and submit >> one >> formal proposal for one of the two projects? >> >> >> To anyone else still reading, could you please post any interest in >> either >> of the following projects: >> >> 1.) Pathfinding And Steering >> -Move the current A* implementation to a HPA* implementation to improve >> performance >> -Fully implementing the steering examples from Craig Reynolds work >> -Improving the interaction between steering and nav-meshes to provide >> usable performance >> >> 2.) Refactoring Quest >> -Standardise the quest system to fit the current standards for property >> classes. >> -Allow for nesting FSMs, direct linking of CEL properties to Quest >> properties >> -Freeing the triggers from within Quest so that access to them is >> available throughout CEL where they may find other uses in future >> expanisions (I.e Behaviour Trees.) >> -Explore the potential of inspiration from the UML techniques >> highlighted >> by Pablo >> >> >> And as I am trying to expand my knowledge of the existing quest system, >> could anyone point me in the direction of documentation regarding this >> that I may have missed. I have already read the CEL User documentation, >> browsed the source code and the CEL diagram that I found very useful >> inside the Developers Whiteboard. >> >> Kind Regards, >> Sam. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Cel-main mailing list >> Cel-main@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cel-main >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Cel-main mailing list > Cel-main@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cel-main > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Cel-main mailing list Cel-main@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cel-main
