Re: Modelica

On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Tiller, Michael (M.M.) wrote:

> I noticed you mention Modelica in your web site.  You indicate that
> Modelica is not sufficient for your needs.  I would be interested in
> hearing what you find deficient.
>
The Modelica people decided to steer away from the Bond graph ideas
behind modelling of dynamical systems, which is in my opinion a poor
decision, because the ideas behind bond graphs (with or without the
possibly clumsy notation :-) ) really represent the physics of
mechanical systems...
Another `deficiency' (which could easily be solved by Modelica) is the
data structure: an XML-based language would have been much more
versatile.

But mind you: at the time being, I still haven't found anything better
than Modelica, and I am not squarely against it. Moreover, there are
already nice examples of modelled robots in Modelica (thanks to Martin
Otter), including models of drives and controlers.

Anyway, Orocos' design is not my private property, i.e., I welcome
motivated contributions and critics from everybody :-)

Best regards,

Herman

-- 
"I decry the current tendency to seek patents on algorithms. There are
 better ways to earn a living than to prevent other people from making
 use of one's contributions to computer science."  D.E. Knuth, TAoCP 3