On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 13:00:00 -0500 David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That's actually becoming a bit of a problem -- I couldn't use FGModel >for the 3D model either because JSBSim had already taken it. As Andy >keeps reminding us, it would be a good idea to put JSBSim and possibly >SimGear into their own namespaces to avoid conflicts like these. Oh, I forgot to mention, too, that we need to be careful on naming conventions here. IMHO, FGModel is not as appropriate as FG3DModel for what you were referring to. We have FGAircraft, which encompasses the physical aircraft characteristics in order to model its flight. We might also want to have an FG3DAircraft or FGAircraft3DModel to represent the visual representation. In the context of a standalone FDM - if not an FDM that FlightGear uses - we were careful in creating all our class names. In hindsight, we might have preferred to not call everything FG**** Jon _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
