On 5 Oct 2012, at 11:32, Alexis Bory wrote: > When you do that code reading (as I do it currently for the engines) it > appears that at least some crucial parts are not such a woodoo and it > appears that adding features to improve the FDM capabilities is not such > a crazy idea. For that we would only need to understand precisely the > whole existing system/code and document it, then design our features and > get help from a C++ expert for the writing. We can do that.
Just to say, there are some pending merge requests to add some Yasim features, but we have an issue that since none of the current C++ developers own, or are experts in Yasim, we're reluctant to be the person who merges such changes, and potentially introduces subtle regressions. Obviously this is chicken-and-egg, since no one can become expert enough in the code to become a maintainer :) So, I'm more than happy to apply patches *providing* I can be convinced they are sane+reasonable from a pure code perspective (happy to help with that, too, if people are new to C++), and providing we have some assurance that a representative sample of yasim aircraft are unchanged or improved by the patch. Suggestions for that means in practice, are most welcome! Otherwise I worry, given the nature of the solver, we'll keep optimising the solver for some aircraft, and making other existing aircraft worse - until someone tests them, and announced that they're no longer working. James ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
