From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d923bb34ea827f56 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Sam Harbaugh (at Home)" Subject: Re: Ada / Boeing 777 Date: 1996/03/23 Message-ID: <199603231303.IAA28759@bb.iu.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 143847335 sender: Ada programming language x-sender: harbaugh@iu.net comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Date: 1996-03-23T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Matt Kennel wrote: >The representation (aka implementation) of angle is wrong. >It should be a complex number of unit magnitude. Rotations in any >direction can be implemented as complex multiplication without any >discontinuities, wrap around errors or problems at 0 or 180 or 360 >degrees. >This is an easy 2-d representation of the rotation group. 3-d is >trickier: either Euler angles or quaternions. I agree with Matt. In my posting I assumed that the Airbus software used better than one degree integer heading values and that the original poster was simplifying it to make his point clearer. The point of my post was to call attention to the possible absence of domain expertise in and around the software development activity. I have boxes of simulator code, F4, V22, etc. and without looking I recall that all of them use quaternions. > See, sometimes physicists *can* be useful. ;-) Yes Matt, I agree. Where would we engineers be without the understanding of nature that the physicists provide. (serious, no smiley). sam harbaugh harbaugh@acusys.com