Honestly I do not understand the meaning of what you write ... I would like to remind his lordship that I made SW simulation with the same technique of JSBSim, as already written in the premise of this post, so I can understand how it works ... and for this I can also know how it is possible to parallel it since I have also developed algorithms for the parelization of simulators derived from CSMP (Continuous Systems Modeling Package
http://www.smrcc.org.uk/members/g4ugm/csmp1130.htm from which also JSBSim derives). However, many of these simulators with RT capabilities use the technique of running a module only if indeed its input variables have been changed (binary flags are used), my feeling is that JSBSim does so, noting the fact that a switch if it points to a nonexistent parameter, it does not report the error until it is actually executed ... just like your wonderful NASAL.
Personally I prefer, if possible, to use JSBSim instead of NASAL because JSBSim is much easier to keep it in time also by other programmers (as indeed all the languages derived from the methods introduced 50 years ago by the CSMP CSMP / 1130
http://media.ibm1130.org/1130-002-ocr.pdf). NASAL is a jumble of languages, maintained by someone (perhaps one or two programmers) and little documented! This fact has long generated a complaint of those who would like to replace NASAL with Python!
Flightgear has a few nice things in terms of programming languages: XML for managing graphic objects and JSBSim. Whenever I am forced to use NASAL, maybe within the XML as sometimes happens, I get nervous and sad because I understand that I am putting in the code a piece.
Thorsten wrote in Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:58 pm:Personally, I find it odd that a day after you could be persuaded to do an implemention JSBSim-side (which you called too big a performance drain before) feel the need to now lecture others on the relative merits of JSBSim vs. Nasal - you simply don't have the experience to do that after a day
If instead his lordship real height, read the meaning of what you write, he would have discovered that my question was how to perform an animation in XML with smooth movement without using NASAL! As it is clear that NASAL disgusts me! Is it clear or not?
My surprise, in this post, was to read that is possible efficiently replace parts of NASAL with JSBSim code because is possible slow down the single channel. So I immediately wanted to verify by taking one NASAL code of the G91R1B and take it, in an orderly manner, in JSBSim ... and I noticed that it works very well, which is execute when really necessary and with a reaction time that with NASAL I dreamed because JSBSim processes are performed with a very efficient batch technique .... not only, but the code is readable!
Now I wait, if you want, to receive your apologies for having moved the topic of this post from a technician to your personal upsets, without giving a valid help ... a help that instead others have given in this post that I find very interesting and instructive. However, as already happened, from now I no longer respond to what you write in this post, as I am sure it is a perfect waste of time.