> Would be interesting to see how much easier it will be to implement in Nim
> compared to C++.
I already know that some of the run-time errors I had were due to permissive
language features of C++ which Nim doesn't allow. For instance, I once used =
where I should have used ==.
Alas, a
That's some heavy stuff! And equally as interesting. Is it something you use
often?
Randomness heavy stuff ;-) How is Nim's support for random number generation?
What would be a typical problem solved with these?
Symbolic computation is a really cool tech. It's amazing that a computer can
"understand" math to a certain extent :-D. Would be interesting to see how much
easier it will be to implement in Nim compared to C++.
Your project seems really cool ;-) I really like the simplistic graphics!
The integrators are my favorite part of the simulations :-D It's really
interesting to compare the different integrators around. In this simulation
that is written in Javascript I have implemented most of the integrators
Have you considered
electronic circuit simulation like
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPICE](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPICE)
Monte Carlo simulation, stochastic differential equations, partial differential
equations
Recently I really got interested in orbits and gravitational n-body, it sounds
like you are interested in this as well:
[https://github.com/treeform/orbits](https://github.com/treeform/orbits)
* I can do Simple Elliptical Orbits, based on orbital elements.
* I can do orbits based on Kernel
Symbolic computation. When my current project is done (implementing an
algorithm in C++) I want to do a comparison between C++, Nim, Ada, and perhaps
something else.
I'm a computational science enthusiast and I've mostly dabbled with Python
because of its ease of writing code. But it was lacking the speed I wanted for
my simulations (mostly gravitational n-body) so I started looking into other
options and I found Nim. And how grateful I am for that! It
10 matches
Mail list logo
