Sounds pretty good, and we don't even have to run the server. :-)

Sign me up. I don't know how much I'll be contributing--I've got, as my
managers and colleagues remind me, plenty of other work--but I want to at
least have the opportunity.
--
Randolph M. Fritz • [email protected]
Environmental Energy Technologies Division • Lawrence Berkeley Labs

On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:13 PM, David Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> Wow, thanks to all who replied. I'll try to address some of the raised
> eyebrows now, and answer the more technical ones later.
>
> My goal was an easier way to do some analysis that would require more
> than simple shell scripts. Or rather, a way to do some things that
> would probably be easier in a higher level language. I just so happen
> to do a lot in Python, and I think it's a relatively simple language
> to pick up, and its syntax looks like pseudocode.
>
> Some more complicated scripts can get hard to follow with lots of
> system calls, stringing together variables, or keeping track of and
> deleting temporary files. I think that a Python package could be more
> user friendly by making a simple interface and taking care of that
> sort of thing automatically and invisibly. Also it could take
> advantage of some of the more interesting Python capabilities such as
> using distributed tasks (multiprocessor/multi-machine), pre-written
> data processing libraries, image libraries, etc.
>
> Since, as has been pointed out, the same code can run essentially
> unmodified on any modern system that can run Radiance, there is the
> possibility that this can create an easy way to exchange ideas and
> create novel approaches to analysis. The architecture scripting
> community is surprisingly active.
>
> However, all I really wanted to do initially was provide a simple
> interface back to Radiance, then step back and maintain/optimize it. I
> hadn't given much technical thought other than it ought to at least
> start out as a wrapper program. Because of the modularity of it all,
> that could be changed later. I wasn't really aiming to replace things
> like the csh scripts, although this would make it easy for someone to
> do so if they wanted. I wanted for it to be as transparent as possible
> through to Radiance proper.
>
> Finally, I really appreciate the volunteers. I'm not a programming
> novice, but I'm certainly not a guru either. Collaboration is much
> appreciated.
>
> I've registered a Google code page (for now, Mercurial, because I've
> never used it and want to learn it - I hear it's like subversion with
> the benefits of git) at http://code.google.com/p/python-radiance . I
> think that the conversation should be continued in the
> code-development thread, where it will likely get more technical.
>
> --Dave
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Randolph M. Fritz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If people are interested, the Labs is offering subversion server space on
>> one of our servers.  When we get the website update project a bit further
>> along, we'll be able to give the project a page, too.
>>
>> --
>> Randolph M. Fritz • [email protected]
>> Environmental Energy Technologies Division • Lawrence Berkeley Labs
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2010-11-08 08:58:45 -0800, Thomas Bleicher said:
>>
>>  On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Greg Ward <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, it sounds like there is significant groundswell around this idea.
>>>> I suggest that interested parties/developers organize a host site for
>>>> this effort and someone (Dave?) take charge of the project.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Google code projects are easy to set up and almost everyone
>>> in this thread already has a gmail account. It may be more difficult
>>> to find a source control system that everybody agrees on ...
>>>
>>>  Ongoing maintenance is something to think about as well,
>>>> as new Radiance releases will likely continue to have some
>>>> minor changes and some major additions.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Since everybody is happy with a simple 'subprocess' wrapper
>>> around the Radiance binaries there shouldn't be much ongoing
>>> maintenance. Python 2 vs 3 is more likely to cause additional
>>> work than the Radiance interface.
>>>
>>> However, I can see that an additional advantage of this project
>>> could be that the remaining CSH scripts (and possibly Perl scripts)
>>> in the main Radiance distribution get finally pythonized. In that
>>> case should the new scripts be kept separately or should they
>>> find their way back into the distribution?
>>>
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Randolph M. Fritz • [email protected]
>> Environmental Energy Technologies Division • Lawrence Berkeley Labs
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Radiance-general mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Radiance-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Radiance-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev

Reply via email to