On Thursday 01 December 2005 11:12, Erik Hofman wrote: > Joacim Persson wrote: > > On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, David Luff wrote: > >> I have no experience of plugin architectures, and don't feel competent > >> to attempt it at the moment. > > > > First of all: there's obviously no panic. (If there were fifty-seven > > hard-linked GPS models, AP's etc it would be a problem, ;) > > Personally I'd much rather see the rest of FlightGear advance in a > direction that this kind of stuff can be done using Nasal (ultimately). > The bonus is that others gain from those additions too. > > Erik
I'd hate to see full blown graphical GPS units like the Garmin GNS430 running purely in Nasal unless there are lots of generic C/C++ functions that are being called to do the hard work in the background. In MSFS the GPS units and complex instruments are coded in C and you should see how many CPU cycles they require to update. It would only be a lot worse in Nasal. Paul _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [email protected] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
