Hound dog departed

[SHM]

Also more users would know python which means more development

[IAHM-COL]

let aside the amount of documentation, and support that you can have when developing on python,

[LesterBoffo]

I suppose I'm all for more Python scripting in FG, it can't be worse than what we have presently, I use several Pythons in my older 3D programs and cannot complain. But making either Nasal or Python scripts from scratch are well beyond my skillset. I'll just hope the new versions work better than the older ones.

[bomber]

Maybe curts slowly getting the message....

[KL-666]

Yes, this is about the severest reprimand Thorsten gets from that forum keepers. Nothing compared to banning everyone else for less. But let's hope it does the job.

Hi Thorsten,

i'm pretty sure the original poster was simply using an "eye catcher" technique for the subject. It's clear from his tone that he wishes to engage in a positive discussion of these topics. I think when you said "Then I must have misunderstood", you really did read the original message too hastily and really did misunderstand.

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=30606&p=296166#p296166

Maybe it indeed starts to dawn upon the keepers of that forum that Thorsten always viciously attacks everyone. When he was gone, the forum was fine. When he returned he immediately attacks an unsuspecting newcomer again.

Kind regards, Vincent

[IAHM-COL]

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic. ... 06#p296166

Python is a personal interest of mine. I have my own separate UAV autopilot app that used the FlightGear property system. Last winter I redesigned the property system to be based on python core code and built a C++ interface to the python-property system. In the process I took the opportunity to fork off my direction and make substantial changes to my own property system API. However, this required going and porting all my code to the new property system api and testing it. Recently I added json support so that the config files can be json instead of xml. This has some advantages and I found that json mapped a whole lot more naturally to my new python-based property system. The json load/parse/save code is probably half the lines of code compared to the equivalent xml load/parse/save code.

The advantage of a python-based property system is that now embedded python scripts have native access to the property tree and can run any time and read/write values directly. I find this has is a very very powerful approach that enables freely mixing C++ and python modules. It enables me to rewrite big chunks (non-performance critical chunks) of my flight controller in native python. That leads to maybe 50% code reduction, clearer code, simpler code, etc. I also discovered that python's standard library of tools is conceptually very similar to SimGear. For every SimGear library or module, there's almost always a similar if not equivalent python module available to import.

So I like python for non-performance critical coding ... however ...

It is really important to note that in my small application which is probably 1/10 or 1/100th the size of FlightGear, this was a truly massive undertaking to make these changes ... on the order of 2-3 months of pretty much non-stop effort. For FlightGear it would be almost insurmountable...

The Real "WTF" moment, is
Why is curtis *(a core developer)* making such great contributions on a private fork he is keeping for himself?

Is it really unsurmountable for FG? It sounds like big-daddy gave up somehow on the feasibility of his project?

[Octal450]

That is not a reprimand.

[bomber]

I think it was intended as a reprimand... and let me say if it looks like a reprimand, smells like a reprimand, reads like a reprimand, then it is a reprimand.

and yes.....The 'leader' and a 'a core developer' spending months developing in private.... no wonder not a lot gets done in the core.

The Chinese have a saying 'the fish smells from the head down'

[LesterBoffo]

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=30606#p296166

Python is a personal interest of mine. I have my own separate UAV autopilot app that used the FlightGear property system. Last winter I redesigned the property system to be based on python core code and built a C++ interface to the python-property system. In the process I took the opportunity to fork off my direction and make substantial changes to my own property system API. However, this required going and porting all my code to the new property system api and testing it. Recently I added json support so that the config files can be json instead of xml. This has some advantages and I found that json mapped a whole lot more naturally to my new python-based property system. The json load/parse/save code is probably half the lines of code compared to the equivalent xml load/parse/save code.

The advantage of a python-based property system is that now embedded python scripts have native access to the property tree and can run any time and read/write values directly. I find this has is a very very powerful approach that enables freely mixing C++ and python modules. It enables me to rewrite big chunks (non-performance critical chunks) of my flight controller in native python. That leads to maybe 50% code reduction, clearer code, simpler code, etc. I also discovered that python's standard library of tools is conceptually very similar to SimGear. For every SimGear library or module, there's almost always a similar if not equivalent python module available to import.

So I like python for non-performance critical coding ... however ...

It is really important to note that in my small application which is probably 1/10 or 1/100th the size of FlightGear, this was a truly massive undertaking to make these changes ... on the order of 2-3 months of pretty much non-stop effort. For FlightGear it would be almost insurmountable...

The Real "WTF" moment, is
Why is curtis *(a core developer)* making such great contributions on a private fork he is keeping for himself?

Is it really unsurmountable for FG? It sounds like big-daddy gave up somehow on the feasibility of his project?

Curt is developing a R/C model aircraft UAV control system that borrows from some of FG's code, it lets the model fly autonomously. At least that what I got from the thread he did about it.

[bomber]

So the request from Curt to allow a conversation to take place has resulted in Thorsten and Bugman talking shit...

A result all round I'd say.