Very nice!

Is the time coming for a JuliaControl organization?

I am thinking of wrapping the ACADO toolkit: http://acado.github.io/

Regards:

Uwe

On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 3:40:43 PM UTC+1, Fredrik Bagge Carlson 
wrote:
>
> For those finding this page in search for a control systems toolbox:
> The package ControlSystems.jl has seen extensive developement recently, 
> and developement is still ongoing
> https://github.com/JuliaControl/ControlSystems.jl
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 at 10:10:56 AM UTC+2, Uwe Fechner wrote:
>>
>> I created the following issue to track the progress on this:
>> https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/8543
>>
>> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:29:01 PM UTC+2, Spencer Russell wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm looking forward to some sort of flag or option to turn on the 
>>> incremental GC, and trying to understand a bit more about the design space. 
>>> My naive thought process goes something like this:
>>>
>>>    1. The total time to collect garbage probably grows with number of 
>>>    objects and total size to be freed (though maybe size doesn't matter 
>>> much 
>>>    here?)
>>>    2. An incremental GC will collect until it runs out of time, then 
>>>    hand control back to the application until it's time to run again
>>>    3. It seems like there's a rate of garbage generation where you're 
>>>    building up garbage faster than the GC can collect it without missing 
>>> its 
>>>    deadline
>>>    4. It seems like if you stay below this rate you can consider your 
>>>    maximum pause time to be bounded and memory won't be leaking. We hold 
>>> hands 
>>>    and sing songs.
>>>    5. So the issue is what to do when you're above that rate. Either 
>>>    you:
>>>       1. make sure memory consumption doesn't grow indefinitely by 
>>>       having some heuristic for when the GC decides to give up on the 
>>> deadline, OR
>>>       2. make sure the GC never violates its deadline and run the risk 
>>>       of running out of memory
>>>       
>>> Are there other options besides those two?
>>>
>>> I would definitely welcome an actual hard-realtime bounded-pause-time 
>>> GC, but it also seems valuable (and possibly more feasible) to have a GC 
>>> where the pause time is bounded with caveats and more careful programming. 
>>> I'm not sure whether this qualifies as *hard *realtime, though it seems 
>>> like it might if you can make those guarantees about your application code.
>>>
>>> It's also worth mentioning for other folks interested in latency that 
>>> that JIT compilation is a killer as well, so you need to guarantee that 
>>> you're pre-compiled all the possible methods that might get dispatched to.
>>>
>>>
>>> peace,
>>> s
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Uwe Fechner <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jeff Bezanson suggested in the following discussion ( 
>>>>> https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/5227 ):
>>>>> > It would be great to have the option to build with a low-pause GC 
>>>>> for users who might want that.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is exactly what I am looking for: To have two different garbage 
>>>>> collectors for Julia, a fast collector for non-real-time applications and 
>>>>> a 
>>>>> low-latency GC
>>>>> for real-time applications. Uwe
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, that would be great. 
>>>>
>>>
>>>

Reply via email to