You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 12, 2020. It is now read-only.
pyfrc enables this functionality via sim/config.json. It's not super extensible -- so we should change the JSON so that its usable from both pyfrc and websim. Right now, all pyfrc data is read from the 'pyfrc' key -- websim should not do this, nor should it have its own key.
Websim currently doesn't have any tooltips. Do you think the websim and pyfrc sim need to share the same config @virtuald ? Currently the config is under its own "websim" key, the naming is different (e.g. "w" is "width", "starting_x" is "startingX"), and I plan on it having plenty of physics related configuration options the pyfrc sim does not have.
Do you think the configuration should still be under "pyfrc" for the sake of backwards compatibility? I guess I should allow for both "pyfrc" and "websim", that seems to make sense to me.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
pyfrc enables this functionality via
sim/config.json
. It's not super extensible -- so we should change the JSON so that its usable from both pyfrc and websim. Right now, all pyfrc data is read from the 'pyfrc' key -- websim should not do this, nor should it have its own key.A sample configuration?
I'm not convinced that it's totally a good idea to do it this way, I'm open to something more flexible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: