{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Mindwerks/worldengine/issues/246","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Mindwerks/worldengine","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Mindwerks/worldengine/issues/246/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Mindwerks/worldengine/issues/246/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Mindwerks/worldengine/issues/246/events","html_url":"https://github.com/Mindwerks/worldengine/issues/246","id":261829128,"number":246,"title":"Consolidated discussion of ideas related to platec","user":{"login":"MM1nd","id":1690444,"avatar_url":"https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/1690444?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd","html_url":"https://github.com/MM1nd","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MM1nd/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":3,"created_at":"2017-09-30T08:36:26Z","updated_at":"2017-10-01T07:23:16Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"CONTRIBUTOR","body":"Hi,\r\n\r\n1) In my current local version (#245), platec.step is the biggest time consumer. I suspect that this will get relatively worse when I continue to improve on the other parts. I also suspect it will be much harder to make platec faster because the easy way of \"let's move this to numpy\" is not available. I haven't looked into the platec code base, maybe there are some low hanging fruits, but eventually there is only so much that can be done.\r\n\r\n2) Regarding #230, making the python parts faster makes the creation of many maps to choose from more feasible, but eventually platec will be the bottleneck and this is never going to be fun. I think @PeteMichaud is right on that issue: Regarding a world's potential to be interesting it matters far more that the shape changes with resolution than that everything else changes. So my suggestion would be to support running platec at a lower resolution than everything else and upscale the result. So you could indeed create a large number of worlds in a small resolution, select the interesting ones and rerun them with the shapes upscaled and subsequent steps running at full resolution. That way you'll get a world that has the same shape as the low-res one but is different in the details. I think this is a good tradeof.\r\n\r\n- Somewhat related: #80, but what I mean is more than scaling after everything was completed.\r\n\r\n3) Regarding the number of plates obviously we would want to make that an option (#215). I understand @sara-02's question in #227 to go in that direction. However, there are limitations. I don't think a \"realistic\" number of 50 plates, as discussed there, would work, even on the largest currently feasible map sizes. This makes me question two things:\r\n\r\n- For what size is the current default of 10 optimized? @psi29a @ftomassetti ?\r\n- More generally, how should the relationship between map size and numbers of plates be? Making this an option is fine, but the default should probably depend (logarithmically?) on the size of the map. For very small maps I think even 10 plates is too much.\r\n\r\nCheers\r\nAlex"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Mindwerks/worldengine/issues/comments/333358849","html_url":"https://github.com/Mindwerks/worldengine/issues/246#issuecomment-333358849","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Mindwerks/worldengine/issues/246","id":333358849,"user":{"login":"ftomassetti","id":439078,"avatar_url":"https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/439078?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti","html_url":"https://github.com/ftomassetti","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ftomassetti/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2017-10-01T07:23:16Z","updated_at":"2017-10-01T07:23:16Z","author_association":"MEMBER","body":"I agree, I think WorldEngine should be modular. However that will mean a more complex interface for the user and the necessity for clearer documentation"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"ftomassetti"}}