Bug 482 - Add constant acceleration mobility model
: Add constant acceleration mobility model
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
: ns-3
mobility models
: ns-3-dev
: All All
: P5 enhancement
Assigned To:
:
:
:
:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2009-01-28 13:29 EDT by
Modified: 2009-03-10 09:28 EDT (History)


Attachments
the patch (5.58 KB, patch)
2009-01-28 13:29 EDT, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro
Details | Diff


Note

You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Description From 2009-01-28 13:29:54 EDT
Created an attachment (id=364) [details]
the patch

I wrote a ConstantAccelerationMobilityModel which could be useful to others.
------- Comment #1 From 2009-02-25 05:29:16 EDT -------
this patch looks good to me. I am not too fond of the naming from a consistency
perspective: if you want to use 'Constant' instead of 'Static', we need to
change the existing 'Static' models. Otherwise, I would tend to rename your
'Constant' into 'Static'.

What do you prefer ?
------- Comment #2 From 2009-02-25 06:00:42 EDT -------
I'd rename StaticSpeedMobilityModel to ConstantSpeedMobilityModel.  But
StaticMobilityModel should of course remain unchanged; it really is static, so
the name makes perfect sense.
------- Comment #3 From 2009-02-25 06:26:55 EDT -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'd rename StaticSpeedMobilityModel to ConstantSpeedMobilityModel.  But
> StaticMobilityModel should of course remain unchanged; it really is static, so
> the name makes perfect sense.
> 

hrm. How about ConstantPositionMobilityModel, ConstantSpeedMobilityModel, and,
ConstantAccelerationMobilityModel ?
------- Comment #4 From 2009-02-25 06:40:13 EDT -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > I'd rename StaticSpeedMobilityModel to ConstantSpeedMobilityModel.  But
> > StaticMobilityModel should of course remain unchanged; it really is static, so
> > the name makes perfect sense.
> > 
> 
> hrm. How about ConstantPositionMobilityModel, ConstantSpeedMobilityModel, and,
> ConstantAccelerationMobilityModel ?
> 

That sounds good.

But it is a lot of API change.  While it won't affect me personally (since I'll
keep using a patched ns 3.2), maybe it's better to ask in ns-developers?  And
this change would be for ns-3.4 or later?
------- Comment #5 From 2009-03-10 09:28:19 EDT -------
changeset e57ced8f6660