On Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2004 03:41, David Megginson wrote:
What is the best way (most supported, cross-platform) to turn an integer
into an STL string type? Or, even an ASCII char[]?
It seems that itoa() is not totally common.
snprintf() is in ISO C99 but not ANSI C -- you could check to
Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
No itoa is not standard. I have already a patch on top of Jons changes to
JSBSim in my local tree which uses stringstream which is standard C++ since
ages.
The stringstream class would have the advantage that it is not error prone to
buffer overflows.
Comments on known
The other advantage of defining specific function is consistency across
aircraft models. As as user, I'd want to know that a certain key drops
the arrestor hook, and that that same key drops the hook in all aircraft
that have one. If we just make aircraft modellers use a certain set of
keys,
Giles Robertson wrote:
The other advantage of defining specific function is consistency across
aircraft models. As as user, I'd want to know that a certain key drops
the arrestor hook, and that that same key drops the hook in all aircraft
that have one. If we just make aircraft modellers use a
On Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2004 10:05, Erik Hofman wrote:
Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
No itoa is not standard. I have already a patch on top of Jons changes to
JSBSim in my local tree which uses stringstream which is standard C++
since ages.
The stringstream class would have the advantage that it
Hi guys!
Here is my new VBO code but it's so strange that it doesn't work with
flightgear give me segfault
also notice that it doesn't work with ptherads (I don't know why too)
So I move all vertex,tex,norm,color to constructor from draw method
plib applications work fine but there is a problem
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Here's a quick status update on my efforts to update the world scenery
build.
It looks fantastic.
I've not had chance to look at the runways file yet, but are the
taxiways automatically generated if none are available in the file? It
seems there's a generic parallel
Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
No itoa is not standard. I have already a patch on top of Jons changes to
JSBSim in my local tree which uses stringstream which is standard C++
since ages.
The stringstream class would have the advantage that it is not error
prone
On Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2004 11:16, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
Personally, I prefer std::ostringstream, but itoa, _snprintf (with a
leading underscore ), ostrstream and std::ostringstream are in Visual C++ 6
and after :
Yep, the ostringstream variant is better ...
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
Here is my new VBO code but it's so strange that it doesn't work with
flightgear give me segfault
also notice that it doesn't work with ptherads (I don't know why too)
So I move all vertex,tex,norm,color to constructor from draw method
plib applications work fine but
Is there an autopilot that still uses the
/autopilot/settings/waypoint
method of setting waypoints? (i.e., one that can accept
modifications to the waypoint list via the telnet interface)?
Or has that been replaced with
/autopilot/route-manager/wp/id ?
If so, how does an external program
On Thursday 27 May 2004 09:07, Erik Hofman wrote:
Giles Robertson wrote:
The other advantage of defining specific function is consistency across
aircraft models. As as user, I'd want to know that a certain key drops
the arrestor hook, and that that same key drops the hook in all aircraft
For those of us who use the mouse to control the aircraft, using a mouse
to lean isn't the best system. (though I admit, I do already pause the
simulation to change views, though more often I just zoom out to a wider
angle.
Giles Robertson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original
Erik Hofman wrote:
Giles Robertson wrote:
The other advantage of defining specific function is consistency across
aircraft models. As as user, I'd want to know that a certain key drops
the arrestor hook, and that that same key drops the hook in all aircraft
that have one. If we just make aircraft
Josh Babcock wrote:
So maybe airplanes shouldn't be in the interface business. Maybe we
should spend our energy agreeing on property conventions and Nasal
scripts.
Even better would be to take a big audit of all the existing bindings
and re-assign them from scratch. We've accumulated all
Josh Babcock wrote:
Comments?
Yeah, you should be a politician.
You're trying to change the whole thing by neglecting the historical
perspective, stating 'we' while you're actually trying to say 'you guys'
for trying to solve your problems.
First try searching for an aircraft that has a boost
* Andy Ross -- Thursday 27 May 2004 21:18:
IMHO, we want to adhere to *either* the traditional toggle convention
*or* the no-shift-means-down/shift-means-up idea. Using a combination
in the default mappings is confusing. Likewise, we have other
bindings (magnetos, flaps) that use yet another
On Thursday 27 May 2004 20:18, Andy Ross wrote:
Josh Babcock wrote:
So maybe airplanes shouldn't be in the interface business. Maybe we
should spend our energy agreeing on property conventions and Nasal
scripts.
Even better would be to take a big audit of all the existing bindings
and
Josh Babcock said:
snip
This leaves several keys totally unused, I would suggest reserving defyuDEFYU
and their CTRL modifiers for aircraft and putting a note as such in
keyboard.xml
so people don't create conflicts in their local configs and also so that
airplane builders will know
* Melchior FRANZ -- Thursday 27 May 2004 21:38:
It's considered in the true map.pdf document, at
http://member.aon.at/mfranz/map.pdf. This is only occasionally
committed to cvs.
Whoops ... make that: http://members.aon.at/mfranz/map.pdf
^
m.
Erik Hofman writes:
Yeah, you should be a politician.
You're trying to change the whole thing by neglecting the historical
perspective, stating 'we' while you're actually trying to say 'you guys'
for trying to solve your problems.
ROTFL :-)
Norman
Andy Ross said:
Josh Babcock wrote:
So maybe airplanes shouldn't be in the interface business. Maybe we
should spend our energy agreeing on property conventions and Nasal
scripts.
Even better would be to take a big audit of all the existing bindings
and re-assign them from scratch.
Andy Ross wrote:
Josh Babcock wrote:
So maybe airplanes shouldn't be in the interface business. Maybe we
should spend our energy agreeing on property conventions and Nasal
scripts.
Even better would be to take a big audit of all the existing bindings
and re-assign them from scratch. We've
Lee Elliott wrote:
On Thursday 27 May 2004 20:18, Andy Ross wrote:
Josh Babcock wrote:
So maybe airplanes shouldn't be in the interface business. Maybe we
should spend our energy agreeing on property conventions and Nasal
scripts.
Even better would be to take a big audit of all the existing
Lee Elliott said:
I hope there's no flame war over this - it's too important.
Part of the problem with coming up with a good keyboard mapping scheme is that
a comprehensive survey of the requirements needs to be done before anything
can be planned e.g. are slats simply toggleable (erk!)
On Thursday 27 May 2004 21:17, Jim Wilson wrote:
Lee Elliott said:
I hope there's no flame war over this - it's too important.
Part of the problem with coming up with a good keyboard mapping scheme is
that a comprehensive survey of the requirements needs to be done before
anything can
On Thursday 27 May 2004 21:21, Josh Babcock wrote:
Lee Elliott wrote:
On Thursday 27 May 2004 20:18, Andy Ross wrote:
Josh Babcock wrote:
So maybe airplanes shouldn't be in the interface business. Maybe we
should spend our energy agreeing on property conventions and Nasal
scripts.
Even
Has anyone tried taking the c172 autopilot and
converting it into a graphical representation? For possible use into
Simulink?
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Thursday 27 May 2004 21:51, Jim Wilson wrote:
Lee Elliott said:
I think a survey would be a good idea, for the same reason I suggested
something like a wiki for doing it - without making sure that every
possibility is in some way catered for some things could be excluded or
impossible.
I see it a real pilot has to let go of something to twiddle a dial
anyway, we shouldn't complain if we have to as well.
A real pilot can keep one hand on the yoke and twiddle a dial with
another. He or she may also have a copilot. I use mouse control as I'm
without a joystick, and having either
shammake wrote:
Has anyone tried taking the c172 autopilot and converting it into a
graphical representation? For possible use into Simulink?
Do you mean creating a 2D or 3D instrument? Autopilots tend to go by brand
rather than aircraft model. The most popular new autopilots seem to be the
Giles Robertson wrote:
I see it a real pilot has to let go of something to twiddle a dial
anyway, we shouldn't complain if we have to as well.
A real pilot can keep one hand on the yoke and twiddle a dial with
another. He or she may also have a copilot. I use mouse control as I'm
without a
The last two days I've been hammering on the nav database code. My
first goal is to directly support Robin's native nav database file
format. In his latest data release, he separates out dme, gs, loc, and
marker beacon transmitters rather than lumping them all into a single
ILS record. This
One idea is to only bind keys to flight controls and autopilot on/off. All
other stuffs should be done similar to what you do on your desktop. For
example, say you want to toggle a switch and then turn a nob clockwise to
change the settings of a certain system, what you should be required to
Ok then, I'll try asking it this way:
In auto_gui.cxx, the comment on NewWaypoint says that it is
called from the telnet session, but I cannot show that to be the
case. Setting the property value from the telnet session causes
the value to change, but it doesn't seem to affect anything. Is
Here is what I have so far:
http://www.cs.yorku.ca/~cs233144/2004052701.jpg
http://www.cs.yorku.ca/~cs233144/2004052702.jpg
Here is a link to photos of the actual cockpit:
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=McDonnell%
20Douglas%20MD-11%7CBoeing%
On Thursday 27 May 2004 21:44, Jim Wilson wrote:
Josh Babcock said:
snip
This leaves several keys totally unused, I would suggest reserving
defyuDEFYU and their CTRL modifiers for aircraft and putting a note as
such in
keyboard.xml
so people don't create conflicts in their local
On Thu, 27 May 2004 21:38:29 +0200, Melchior wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Andy Ross -- Thursday 27 May 2004 21:18:
IMHO, we want to adhere to *either* the traditional toggle
convention*or* the no-shift-means-down/shift-means-up idea. Using a
combination in the default mappings
On Thu, 27 May 2004 21:31:10 +0200, Erik wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
First try searching for an aircraft that has a boost function for it's
engine *and* that has speebrakes.
..AFAIR, this was a kludge to get around a few problems modelling
gear shift controls on geared super-chargers
You people are nuts! LOL!
Regards,
Ampere
On May 27, 2004 03:54 pm, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Thu, 27 May 2004 21:38:29 +0200, Melchior wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Andy Ross -- Thursday 27 May 2004 21:18:
IMHO, we want to adhere to *either* the traditional toggle
40 matches
Mail list logo
