I was implicitly referring to Python/C model for this.
I'm aware that Python can be very slow on heavy computations (it's a
_documented_ shortcoming), sometimes much slower than Simulink.
I believe that no current technology can meet the needs of both rapid
prototyping (for projects in their infan
In your simulator how much do you want Python to do? I ask this
because your subject title implies you want to write your simulation
code in Python but a simulator written entirely in Python would be
very slow. Python is an interpreted language and pure Python code is
not suitable for simulating
> I am aware of some shortcomings and design flaws of Simulink,
> especially in the code generation area. I am interested by
> your paper nonetheless, please send me copy.
Ok no problem. Let me just a few days to strip any irrelevant data on
it...
> However, Simulink is used by many people on a d
Nicolas,
I am aware of some shortcomings and design flaws of Simulink,
especially in the code generation area. I am interested by
your paper nonetheless, please send me copy.
However, Simulink is used by many people on a day-to-day basis
in the context of big, industrial projects. The claim that
Hello Phil,
I'm currently looking to see if I can build upon SimPy, thus making it
an hybrid system simulator. That would be a great step for the
community.
Main difficulty would be to build a framework which isn't clumsy, like
you said.
I have close to no experience in Python and object oriented
Nicholas,
I have a particular interest in this subject as well. I've also used
the Python/Scipy combination, and it is a tantalizing combination, but
I found it to be a bit more clumsy than I'd like. Plus, my need for
continuous-time simulation is not as great as it has been in the past.
That sai
Simulink is well fitted for small simulators, but when you run into big
projects, I find many shortcomings appears which made the whole thing
next to unusable for our kind of projects.
That's why I'm interested in Python by the way, it is not a simple clone
like Scilab/Scicos. It is a real languag
Simulink is a framework widely used by the control engineers ...
It is not *perfect* but the ODEs piece is probably the best
part of the simulator. Why were you not convinced ?
You may also have a look at Scicos and Ptolemy II. These
simulators are open-source ... but not based on Python.
Cheers
Nicolas Pernetty wrote:
> I'm looking for any work/paper/ressource about continuous system
> simulation using Python or any similar object oriented languages (or
> even UML theory !).
>
> I'm aware of SimPy for discrete event simulation, but I haven't found
> any work about continuous system.
> I
I don't know much about numerical aerodynamics, but assume that you are
interested in a finite element solver. I googled a bit and found the
following projects. The first is a 2d finite element solver for python.
The second is a 2d finite element solver without python.
http://ellipt2d.sourceforge.
Thanks, but what is really difficult is not to understand how to design
the program which solve a specific problem but to design a generic
framework for solving all these kinds of problem. And in a simple enough
way for basic programmers (but good scientists !) to handle it.
*** REPLY SEPA
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 22:30:00 -0700, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote :
> Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:12:22 +0200, Nicolas Pernetty
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> declaimed the following in
> > comp.lang.python:
> >
> > > I'm aware of SimPy for discrete event simulation, but I
Hello Phil,
Yes I have considered Octave. In fact I'm already using Matlab and
decided to 'reject' it for Python + Numeric/numarray + SciPy because I
think you could do more in Python and in more simple ways.
Problem is that neither Octave, Matlab and Python offer today a
framework to build conti
Nicholas,
Have you looked at Octave? It is not Python, but I believe it can talk
to Python.
Octave is comparable to Matlab for many things, including having ODE
solvers. I have successfully used it to model and simulate simple
systems. Complex system would be easy to model as well, provided that
y
François Pinard wrote:
> [Robert Kern]
>
>>[...] an ODE integrator would probably want to adaptively select its
>>timesteps as opposed to laying out a uniform discretization upfront.
>
> Eons ago, I gave myself such a little beast (but really found in an
> Appendix of a book on simulation), which
[Robert Kern]
> [...] an ODE integrator would probably want to adaptively select its
> timesteps as opposed to laying out a uniform discretization upfront.
Eons ago, I gave myself such a little beast (but really found in an
Appendix of a book on simulation), which I use since then whenever I
need
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:12:22 +0200, Nicolas Pernetty
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
>
>>I'm aware of SimPy for discrete event simulation, but I haven't found
>>any work about continuous system.
>>I would like to develop a generic contin
A good starting point is the book "Python Scripting for Computational
Science" by Hans Petter Langtangen. The book covers topics that go
from simulating second order mechanical systems to solving partial
differentail equations.
Howard
Nicolas Pernetty wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for any work
18 matches
Mail list logo
