Jon S Berndt said:

> Also, ask yourself the question, does the normalized value of, say, 
> 0.5 really correspond to 30 degrees of flaps when the total range is 0 
> to 60?

No telling.  How many angles can you discern at 50 meters on a 1600 pixel
screen (not to mention 800)? :-)
 
> > Also, to have some objects reported normalized and other objects 
> >reported
> > actual would be too confusing...even if the distinctions and reasons 
> >were
> > logically sensible.  In the long run we'll benefit the most from 
> >consistency
> > even if it means more work at the FDM interface.
> 
> Not sure I agree here. It should not be a big deal to have two 
> subclasses, one to handle normalized and one to handle not normalized.

The 3D modeler would need to know which class object X belonged to.  Well...I
suppose...as usual I'm just too easily confused :-)
 
> It's not such a big deal to me except in that I don't want the FDM to 
> be dealing with things it does not need to be dealing with - I want to 
> work towards reducing "excess baggage" from JSBSim proper. I'd be 
> content with moving normalization into the interface class.
 
That's an option.

Best,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to