RE: Modelica
"Tiller, Michael (M.M.)" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.science.robotics.orocos.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> From: Herman Bruyninckx [mailto:[email protected]] > Subject: RE: [Orocos] Modelica > > > On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Stramigioli, S wrote: > > > > 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... > [...] > > Well, the complete bondgraph geometrical setting is > implemented in 20sim. > > It has its own language and the underlying structure is > well geometrically > > defined using screws. > > > Is the specification of this language publicly available? Is it a good > substitute for Modelica? > > Maybe you can answer to the remarks of Michael Tiller: what exactly is > good about bond graphs that is lacking in Modelica. Or maybe the > problem that the bond graph/20Sim people have with Modelica is not > about the language, but about the company behind it? One little semantic detail. The Modelica language is a specification, not a tool. As such, there is no single company or individual behind it. The specification is developed by the Modelica Association (representing vendors, universities, users, etc) which allows anyone interested to participate in the language development. My comments have been strictly on the topic of the language and not on any particular tool. > Herman -- Mike