yade-dev team mailing list archive

[Václav Šmilauer <eu@xxxxxxxx>]

> I realized the change when my scripts crashed. I have many scripts using this and no time
> to learn and convert all of them to the type of energy tracing you implemented. This is
> one reason.
It would be fairly easy to create a proxy function of the law functor 
that would return the value stored in scene->energy.
> Cpu time is another reason (else I would have keep this change in local). It seems that
> track energy will compute all types of energy at each iterations while I need only a few
> of them and not at each iteration.
Yes, I was thinking about this, but to me it is no big deal. The 
non-incremental ones could be computed only during the steps when they 
are really needed (plotted etc).
> I also got the impression that comparing strings in energy->add(dissip,"plastDissip",...),
> and calling those python functions is a lot more expensive than a single plasticE+=. Not sure.
> Also, I didn't know : do track energy work in parallel?
It works in parallel (of course). The string comparison is there only 
the first time, then it is stored in the index variable (do you think I 
would not think about performance?).
> The less rational reason is I knew my scripts conserve energy, while everything else I see
> on yade lists seem to eat energy somehow.
Oh, but I was just storing the same numbers differently, that is obvious 
from the code. I would think that you just don't know that the energy is 
not conserved, because you don't look at all the contributions, that's 
perhaps how your scripts "conserve" energy? I mean, come on, the plastic 
dissipation it clearly not computed correctly, you don't agree?

Cheers!