From: andy p. <bod...@gm...> - 2013-09-29 00:15:59
|
On 29 September 2013 01:07, Chris Radek <ch...@ti...> wrote: > Robert, thanks for your interest; I am working on digesting your > paper. The idea of basically building the current trajectory then iteratively improving it seems interesting. It may be worth considering working only on a "patch" of moves that encompasses the distance required to stop in. Something else that would be useful would be to be able to run the motion backwards (EDM) , so keeping the already-completed moves in memory might be useful too. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto |