Re: Robustness Check and "A growing body of ad-hoc analysis solutions"

[Paul E. Johnson]

Benedikt Stefansson wrote:
> 
I think it makes sense
> to provide Drone like capability in what is being presented as a basic
> toolbox for simulation.
> 

I've thought so all along. That's part of the reason I worked so hard to
make RepeatingHeatbugs work, so that I could point students to a direct
way to repeat a simulation.  

But now that I've seen how Drone can be made to work in a simple, direct
way, I'm not sure any more.  Now that I can point students to an
application of Drone that does not require much tedious fiddling, I am
not so worried.  Instead of working to build this capacity into swarm,
perhaps we should work on getting  a simple, direct explanation of how
to setup drone (which is simple), write an Argument class object, and go
from there.

I'm not sure how to best present this, but I may graft the simple drone
approach onto Heatbugs and distribute it. I found it very difficult to
make it work, but it was difficult because I was completely naive and
untrained in argument processing and because the drone manual was
written before Swarm had settled on an argument passing scheme and
because the available example of drone usage relied on complicated,
extraneous support classes that were specialized by their authors.
 
-- 
Paul E. Johnson                         email: address@hidden
Dept. of Political Science              http://lark.cc.ukans.edu/~pauljohn
University of Kansas                    Office: (785) 864-9086
Lawrence, Kansas 66045                  FAX: (785) 864-5700

                  ==================================
   Swarm-Support is for discussion of the technical details of the day
   to day usage of Swarm.  For list administration needs (esp.
   [un]subscribing), please send a message to <address@hidden>
   with "help" in the body of the message.