Posted: Tue Apr 23, 2013 7:54 pm
Good point here, Curtis!zoidsoft wrote:The best way to make sure there are no errors is to test the algorithms and include debug info with the application. However I would say many errors come about from those not well schooled in primary directions trying to get a certain result with incorrect options. For this reason, PD's just are not for beginners. Study and practice is essential if you hope to know what you are looking at.
Unfortunatelly, I'm trying to compare my calculations with pyMorinus, which many people seems to be using, and I can't get the correct results with it. And, as far as I know, Martin Gansten "worked" with pyMorinus' developer, so, I think it is not the case of lack of practice. Martin Gansten even suggests pyMorinus in his book "Primary Directions".
My calculations are correct, though, hand checked and also by comparing with Primaries.jsp, a jsp service on the web. So something must have changed in pyMorinus, or it's me who can not configure it correctly..
On the parallel discussion about the iterative method, it sounds "interesting" but I'm only implementing the "traditional" semi-arc approach for now..
As for calculations speed, I can compute and draw an entire PD table [0..100arc(~years)], including all major aspects of promissors, and promissors as terms, in less than 1s. And I'm doing this in an interpreted language, where speed is about 1/100 of a native compilation.
I guess it depends a lot of how you have your code structured and simplified. For instance, as you may read in my post, if instead of computing the semiarc using Gansten's formulas, you use "90+AD", you'll save a lot of clock cycles there..
Jo?o Ventura






