Go Back  IT Forums > Software > Programming
User Name
Password
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

re-use in physical simulations
  #1
Old 10-03-2006, 11:31 AM
galathaea
Junior Member


galathaea is offline
galathaea's Info
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2
Default re-use in physical simulations

Daniel T. wrote:
Quote:
galathaea@veawb.coop (galathaea) wrote: I'm not going to discuss the politically charged questions here, because this is not a politically oriented newsgroup.



i would prefer that attitude myself

my only concern is that the political content
may somehow change the technical response

Quote:
are there characteristics of physical simulations that make reuse less advantageous in development? I think reuse across domains has been found to be a chimera. A "Person" in a banking app is far different than a "Person" in a video game for example.



i do not think this is any different than any reuse

you do a domain analysis
you identify actors with some naming scheme
and look for reusable components that satisfy the roles

obviously some components may be "simply named"
in the same manner as the actors of the analysis
but may not play the indicated roles

a physics vector
would not substitute for a container vector
without confusing many roles
(fixed dimensions versus dynamically varying dimensions
interpretation in spaces with dual products defined
etc.)

identifiers can often be made more specific
through a language's namespacing mechanism

ie.
namespace Banking
{
#include "Person.h"
}

Quote:
In the spin you have given your question, you imply that "physical simulation" is a single domain when it isn't. A video game physical simulation is far different than a weather physical simulation, which is different still from a vehicle aerodynamic physical simulation.



i did not mean to imply anything like this

let me try to expand
and please ignore the political data
as only illustrative of the concept in a given domain

a friend of mine wants to do simulations
of the collapse of world trade 7
she has certain non-standard beliefs in this area
but due to her training in physical simulations
she wants to be scientific about it
and run some tests

i usually play devil's advocate to her
but i see such simulations as
potentially offering new engineering solutions
to prevent future collapses

and i have a game physics engine
i have been working on over the years

so
as good americans
we decided to try to find ways to make money
off a national tragedy
by developing some of these simulations
(which she eagerly hopes are actually futile
and goads me on)

now she went and asked the NIST
which has run numerous simulations
of the collapse of the two towers and the nearby wtc7
for a copy of their algorithms and data
(actually, she talked her mate into doing it
who has a more relevant background =) )

the biggest reuse benefit would be the skeleton data for wtc7
as my current models is a very weak mockup from the basic data
found in the FEMA report

very basic composite beam placement
the three main gravity column transfers
the cantilever column transfer on floor 7
four moment frames

but the details can be very important for such models
and it is expected that the data from NIST's models
are more professionally laid out and more detailed

the algorithms used would also be useful
though we have some idea from the NIST report on the two towers
and I suspect my own algorithms
(common statics calculations from a first-year course
with some basic newtonian dynamics)
would give similar results

neither i nor my overeager friend
though
considered it unwise to ask for such details
as we have both done so for published simulations work in the past
(myself in an undergrad paper whose data made it into
work on three-body recombination
and my friend whose grad thesis in optimal circuit design
reused random graph algorithm work of another team)

personally
i think these details have little to do with
what is wise in scientific and engineering simulations
and are more focussed on the issue of reuse in software
and was quite surprised at the quoted out-of-context exchange

but i may be missing some important point here

Quote:
So, to answer your question directly: No, but you can't expect much reuse across different physical simulation domains.



nor would i expect reuse
based merely on names
without having done a role analysis


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar

Reply With Quote
re-use in physical simulations
  #2
Old 10-03-2006, 03:44 PM
Ronald E Jeffries
Junior Member


Ronald E Jeffries is offline
Ronald E Jeffries's Info
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 75
Default re-use in physical simulations

On 3 Oct 2006 12:31:49 -0700, "galathaea" <galathaea@gmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
but i may be missing some important point here


This is off topic for comp.software.extreme-programming. Please don't reply to
all groups.

--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
Reply With Quote
re-use in physical simulations
  #3
Old 10-03-2006, 10:41 PM
galathaea
Junior Member


galathaea is offline
galathaea's Info
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2
Default re-use in physical simulations

In article <bet5i25uhrrh6c04itsilqiuckat71f5uq@4ax.com>, Ron Jeffries
<ronjeffries@acm.org> wrote:

!! On 3 Oct 2006 12:31:49 -0700, "galathaea" <galathaea@gmail.com> wrote:
!!
!! >but i may be missing some important point here
!!
!! This is off topic for comp.software.extreme-programming. Please don't
reply to
!! all groups.


i only desire responses that are topical

when someone mentions
that i may have done something unwise
i go to the experts and try to learn

on these groups
i only want to discuss software process

in particular
i want to see if the software process described
is what agile frameworks would promote

and illustrates a useful method of reuse

because these are the expertise of the groups posted to

i believe it is actually derivable in these frameworks
and is a natural consequence of keep it simple
and generalisations of collective code ownership

chromatic mentions using libraries and 3rd party tools
in his little pocketbook on xp
in illustrating kiss

or

in other words

would an agile team
tasked with building a simulations system for an engineering firm
consider it wise to consult past source of simulations
perhaps requesting source usage priveleges?

or is this unwise?

or is this really orthogonal?

can extreme programming promote methods
that for other reasons are unwise?

is this a flaw?

i do understand the nature of the example
is controversial in and of itself
and will ask if it is unwise in other ways
in the groups appropriate to those ways
without spamming your groups

my problem is that i do not know in what way it is unwise
and would like to seek expert review


i believe my questions were off-topic to the c++ group
which i have removed
(but had kept it to continue the discussion's origin
because i felt it impolite otherwise)


-=-=-=-=-=-=- stuff below the top-post -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-=-=- restores some context -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Quote:
let me try to expand and please ignore the political data as only illustrative of the concept in a given domain a friend of mine wants to do simulations of the collapse of world trade 7 she has certain non-standard beliefs in this area but due to her training in physical simulations she wants to be scientific about it and run some tests i usually play devil's advocate to her but i see such simulations as potentially offering new engineering solutions to prevent future collapses and i have a game physics engine i have been working on over the years so as good americans we decided to try to find ways to make money off a national tragedy by developing some of these simulations (which she eagerly hopes are actually futile and goads me on) now she went and asked the NIST which has run numerous simulations of the collapse of the two towers and the nearby wtc7 for a copy of their algorithms and data (actually, she talked her mate into doing it who has a more relevant background =) ) the biggest reuse benefit would be the skeleton data for wtc7 as my current models is a very weak mockup from the basic data found in the FEMA report very basic composite beam placement the three main gravity column transfers the cantilever column transfer on floor 7 four moment frames but the details can be very important for such models and it is expected that the data from NIST's models are more professionally laid out and more detailed the algorithms used would also be useful though we have some idea from the NIST report on the two towers and I suspect my own algorithms (common statics calculations from a first-year course with some basic newtonian dynamics) would give similar results neither i nor my overeager friend though considered it unwise to ask for such details as we have both done so for published simulations work in the past (myself in an undergrad paper whose data made it into work on three-body recombination and my friend whose grad thesis in optimal circuit design reused random graph algorithm work of another team)


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
Reply With Quote
re-use in physical simulations
  #4
Old 10-05-2006, 09:46 PM
Phlip
Junior Member


Phlip is offline
Phlip's Info
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 327
Default re-use in physical simulations

galathaea wrote:
Quote:
would an agile team tasked with building a simulations system for an engineering firm consider it wise to consult past source of simulations perhaps requesting source usage priveleges? or is this unwise?


Briefly, the system an "agile" team uses to research a domain is orthogonal
to the team's agility. If the domain is physical simulations, then the team
should research pre-existing simulations. Nothing in the Agile literature
mandates this or precludes it.

However, two other important Agile notions are Communication and Courage.
Team members strive to write complete sentences that follow a familiar and
readable structure. And we practice behaving as if we are not afraid of our
target domains - even when we are.
Quote:
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar


Noted!

--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!


Reply With Quote
re-use in physical simulations
  #5
Old 10-08-2006, 01:20 PM
galathaea
Junior Member


galathaea is offline
galathaea's Info
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2
Default re-use in physical simulations

In article <l5mVg.7849$TV3.7386@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>, "Phlip"
<phlipcpp@yahoo.com> wrote:

!! galathaea wrote:
!!
!! > would an agile team
!! > tasked with building a simulations system for an engineering firm
!! > consider it wise to consult past source of simulations
!! > perhaps requesting source usage priveleges?
!! >
!! > or is this unwise?
!!
!! Briefly, the system an "agile" team uses to research a domain is orthogonal
!! to the team's agility. If the domain is physical simulations, then the team
!! should research pre-existing simulations. Nothing in the Agile literature
!! mandates this or precludes it.


is your position that an evaluation of reuse opportunities
is orthogonal to agility?
so where then is the separation?

what parts of process
are to be promoted for agility
and which processes
(even if assisting project completion)
are left open?

i think this is not clear in the literature at all

take xp as an example of such a process
as is core to general agility
the process is composed of self-similar iterations
this distributes the events that will occur
in this process
one should have daily standups to measure velocity
this describes how to spend a certain period time
and specific interactions that should occur
one should write tests to drive or challenge the authored code
this describes specific actions taken
for the purpose of completing the code

some of the literature does indeed make
connections of agility to a process of tool selection

see
java tools for eXtreme programming
or even jeffries own
extreme programming adventures in c#

!! However, two other important Agile notions are Communication and Courage.
!! Team members strive to write complete sentences that follow a familiar and
!! readable structure. And we practice behaving as if we are not afraid of our
!! target domains - even when we are.


in my opinion
the interpretation of "communication" in xp
is one of its weakest positions

communications does not mean establishing formal coding guidelines
in the traditional form of identifierNamingConventions
and layout style guides

because coders should not be allowed
to become frozen and set in one such specification
if they are to debug into many 3rd party libraries
or reuse opensource
or work in multiple languages

if one wants to be
a capable and well-positioned software engineer
in the current turbulent industry
one cannot start getting a left-eyed twitch
every new coding style encountered

instead
i agree with alexandrescu and sutter's coding guideline

don't sweat the small stuff

stay consistent and clear
and focus more on content

communications should focus on the ontology of the software
through sharing an understanding of its layers and types
and should not be brought to a stop by a missing period

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Style Design by vBStyles.com


Top Contact Us - IT Forums - Archive - MyLounge Top
MyLounge.com Site Map
Forum: Cars, Cell Phone, Database, Games, Home Improvement, IT, Music, School, Sports, Web Design, Web Server, Weight Loss

The MyLounge.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for any advice. The information contained on MyLounge.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of MyLounge.com. MyLounge.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation. Please note that our forums also serve as mirrors to Usenet newsgroups. Many posts you see on our forums are made by newsgroup users who may not be members of MyLounge.com Term of Service