> Count me in as "some people"  From the e-mail traffic on this list,
> "some people" also include some very talented developers:
> 
> ?Jon Berndt:
> "I always came back to the conclusion that (vectors) would be a really
> bad idea. And it still is."

The more information I get about the proposal to support vectors as stated, the 
less concerned I am. FlightGear uses properties pretty much for data input as 
far as I can tell. JSBSim does that, but also generates properties on the fly 
and connects them up at runtime and performs specified function operations (of 
any complexity) on them. Having to handle type checking on anything other than 
the double which is assumed might complicate things.

If the new changes are backwards compatible in code, then it may not end up 
being a problem. JSBSim uses some elements of simgear (properties and xml 
handling), and if the props.[ch]xx code (for instance) gets changed a lot, I'm 
concerned that it may negatively impact our operations. I understand that it 
should not impact us, and that we should be OK. But, sometimes in coding there 
are side effects and unintended consequences, and given the magnitude of the 
proposed change, I'm sure we'll proceed with due diligence.

JB



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to