Search the Community

KSPBurst Burst compiler for Kerbal Space Program KSPBurst by itself will not provide any performance benefits. Mods will need to use Unity job system and decorate the jobs with [BurstCompile] to get any improvements. The Burst compiler is archived to prevent KSP from trying to load its dynamic libraries. The archive is extracted the first time the mod runs to <path to KSP>/PluginData/KSPBurst@<mod version>-<archive name>. Burst standard outputs can be found in <path to KSP>/Logs/KSPBurst/ and KSP.log. Repository: https://github.com/KSPModdingLibs/KSPBurst/ Installation Download the latest release from the GitHub releases and extract the archive into your KSP directory. plugins_only version does not contain the compiler, use it only if KSPBurst is a hard dependency and download size is an issue. Alternatively, KSPBurst can be installed from CKAN using KSPBurst identifier. plugins_only version is indexed as KSPBurst-Lite. Compiler version requires Mono, you can download it from here. Burst compiler version can be changed by replacing existing com.unity.burst@<version>.zip archive with a different one. The mod expects the archive to follow <package name>@<package version>.<extension> naming scheme, where <package name> contains burst. If a matching archive was not found, KSPBurst will default to using a compiler matching <path to KSP>/PluginData/*burst*/package/.Runtime/bcl.exe with the greatest package version. Burst packages can be found here. Modders KSPBurst can be bundled with other mods. Bundling plugins_only version will keep the file size down but users will need to download the compiler version for Burst benefits. Burst compatible Unity plugins and their dependencies are also bundled: Unity.Burst 1.5.0 Unity.Mathematics 1.2.1 Unity.Collections 0.1.1-preview Unity.Jobs 0.1.1-preview Configuration Options All configuration options present in KSPBurst.cfg map directly to bcl.exe command line options. If ModuleManager is present, patched options will be used. Building Prerequisites KSP installation python Unity Editor 2019.2.2f1 (if building Unity packages) Configuration Tools read mod configuration options from config.json, users should create config.json.user and override the values there: Option Description unityBuildDir relative path to unity project build directory kspMin minimum compatible KSP version kspMax maximum compatible KSP version version KSPBurst version versionTemplate relative path to version template file unityPackages list of bundled unity packages unityDependencies list of managed plugins that unity packages depend on Tools tools contains python scripts: Script Description post_build.py copy libraries to the mod directory, archive the Burst package if it exists and copy the mod to KSP installation version.py update version information in source files and ReadMe package.py package mod into an archive at archives/, outputs 2 versions, one with and one without the Burst compiler Building the Mod Clone KSPBurst Create Directory.Build.props.user in the root directory with <Project> <PropertyGroup> <KSP_DIR>path to KSP</KSP_DIR> </PropertyGroup> </Project> Depending on the platform you may also need to set DATA_DIRNAME to match your installation. If not building Unity packages, go to to step 7 Open Unity project at Unity/KSPBurst in Unity Editor Build the Unity project and note the build directory Create config.json.user in root directory with { "unityBuildDir": "<relative path to unity build directory in step 5>" } Build KSPBurst with your IDE or from command line, the mod will be copied your KSP installation. If the burst package is present in Unity directory, it may take a while to archive it the first time. License Unity plugins are licensed under under the Unity Companion License for Unity-dependent projects--see Unity Companion License. KSPBurst is licensed under the MIT license Notes System.IO.Compression and System.IO.Compression.FileSystem plugins are used for archive decompression and are bundled with Unity Editor. NuGet package Microsoft.Extensions.FileSystemGlobbing is used for glob pattern matching.

Hey guys! So today I was playing some KSP and I built a rocket which is meant to orbit Kerbin at a low altitude first and then increase the Apoapsis up to 1 000 000 km (So I can get some sweet science from low and high Orbit). After having achieved the 1 mil km I did a stupid mistake and I had to revert to start.This time, I decided to go for a more lazy approach. I decided not to achieve Orbit and just fly straight up. Now something happened which doesnt make any sense in my current understanding of the world. I was only able to achieve about 400 000 km - less than half the amount I was able to reach when flying in orbit. I dont know how this can make any sense: In my first flight I was spending way more time in atmosphere, why I should have lost more speed than in my second attempt. Also I just dont understand how flying vertically results in much lower altitudes than flying horizontally "only". I would be very happy if someone could explain the mathematics behind that. TY very much in advance!

Simple as that. When i was a youngling during my high school days, i disliked math and she disliked me back, like every kid does here where i'm from. After i enrolled in a law college, math kind grew on me. Well, at least the abstract approach to it (ie wikipedia articles like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski's_undefinability_theorem), in which i like reading it, but barely grasp 2,5% of what it actually means). So to say the least, this relationship issue remained somewhat unaltered, but with a plot twist. I now loved math, but she totally did not love me back, still. Then i met Jebediah, Bill, Bob and Valentina, and it changed my life. Now that i'm older, wiser and more patient. I think its time to put the multiplication table out of the cabinet and teach myself orbital mechanics. Therein lies the will to change How to do it? Any tips from the smart people around here on this issue? Any good books on how to get things done? Any online free courses that you know of? I want to be able to actually understand the problems, being able to solve it the hard and easy ways. But it doesn't hurts to ask, are there any life hacks or cheats available? To further enlight the spectrum of my math skills, they are that of a 12 years old (6 years old by japanese standards). The goal is to have somewhat a a grasp of college level calculus, at least into the introduction of it. By then i'll be realized as a human being already, and maybe i'll finally figure out how to to dock directly after ascent. Thanks!!! [snip]

I've been thinking about this for a while and my question is: What is your opinion on there being a natural base or counting system? Taking a Platonic view of the universe, is there any 'system' to the universe regarding numbers, not just 'there are x apples'? I mean, we might just be measuring the universe wrong. Most people would probably default to either base one or binary (base two), but why? Is there any reason that the numbers one and two are special? This brings us to my second questions: Integers. Why are they considered different and get precedence over other numbers? What is even the definition of an integer, I mean even though the number 5 doesn't have any decimals in base ten, if written in base Pi, it's irrational. It might also be that x whole apples are necessarily an integer number of apples, but the operating word is whole and it might just be us that are centred around whole, full and integer, even though they might not be different or special in any way. -T (P.S. Maths counts as science in this forum right?)

I'm a curious fellow. Another topic here on the forums or rather a detour in this topic (the metric vs imperial topic, to be exact) stirred up that curiosity. What is mathematics anyway? So, I began looking around. First stop was ye ol' Wikipedia. Now Wikipedia can be a great source of information but it can be a wild ride sometimes (too often, in fact). Here is what is driving me up the walls (from Wikipedia's article on mathematical structure): "In mathematics, a structure on a set, or more generally a type, consists of additional mathematical objects that..:" So, to understand structure, I should know what a set is but wait no, a set apparently is only part of something bigger, a type so I should look that up first, or should I look at mathematical objects first, to understand better what a type is? So what I did was, as soon as I came across anything to the likes of "based on [new concept here]", or "a sub-set of [new concept here]" etc, I followed those links hoping to get to an even more fundamental er, fundament that would explain a certain idea or term. Soon I came across the article on mathematical objects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_object Now we are rushing towards the realm of philosophy. Still I feel there are even more fundamental terms I should understand before really understanding mathematical objects. Looking around, it is true that often you will find say an explaination of A that requires a prior explaination of B, which itself refers to A for prior explaination, or to C which in turn refers back to A. Circular explainations are tricky. Most of the time, it seems, they ultimately fail to explain but one can not rule out that at the very base, there are in fact some A that can only exist if B exists and vice versa, the two are not the same but one can not exist without the other, and together they do form a unit (in lack of a better word) of foundation which all other ideas rest upon. If anyone here have ever dived into the depth of mathematics, here's a question: Where would one want to start to learn about mathematics in it's purest form if one wants to start at the very start, where the foundations have no further foundations underneath?

This article i found this morning http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2586 I have to say, i never believe anything that i read in Nature or Science in the general science topics. Nature broke me of that in 1986 with thier article about homeopathic behaviors of IgE and the followup test of the lab using the magician the Amazing Randy. Henceforth i consider the Journals to be coffee table science magazines. I read the editorials and i follow the collections, for example the NASA exposee on plutos new horizon, and some of the paleonstuff, always good to search the authors names in other journals though like JHE AJHG AJPA, etc and see if you can find an article that would have the best field specific peer review. Science claims they seek the most qualified referees for each paper, however thier very high rate of retractions suggests otherwise. They always can come up with an answer for you to explain thier failures, the best answer is caveot emtor.