On January 18, 2005 02:21 am, Paul Surgeon wrote: > Running Nasal code in the rendering loop to do tons of work would not be a > very good idea in my opinion. > I've looked through an A320 FCOM manual and it would take many thousands of > lines of C++ to accomplish a half functional aircraft. > I don't think Nasal is the tool for the job. Each aircraft systems are tailored to that aircraft. Using C++ here will be too restrictive and is not going to be a good idea.
> A central processing "blackbox" that contains all the logic for the > aircraft that also get's updated in the rendering loop. > The blackbox will simulate/handle the hydraulic and electrical systems, > generate and feed the display data to the intruments, handle the logic for > failures, receive input from all the simulated aircraft sensors and cockpit > switches, etc. Putting everything in one script is not a good way to do it either. If the hydraulic "system" recieves a runtime error, the electrical system plus everything else are dead. > A generic communications bus that can be used to hook instruments/switches > and the blackbox together. Using a handful of sockets is not a good way to > do it and properties maybe be a bit messy and I would require hundreds of > them. May be the bus can be simulated using the property tree, or inside a root-less node. > Unfortunately this is going to sit on the backburner for a long time as > it's tons of work to implement, I'm already too busy with other projects > and I doubt anybody else would be willing to tackle it in the near future. In the mean time, new planes will come out and they will be just as empty. Ampere _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgearemail@example.com http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d