Make Julia dependency optional with a pure Python simulator? about bondgraphtools HOT 4 CLOSED

Hi Pierre.
Having a pure python simulator would definitely be ideal.

Unfortunately, last i checked SciPy does not have a functioning DAE solver, which is why we're using diffeqpy. However, if there is one floating around it would be great to replace the julia simulator with it.

I think the best approach here would be to see if the SciPy <-> Sundials interface is working, and fix that in SciPy if it's not.
Once that is working, it would be easy to completely remove the julia dependancies (which would be my preference) for simulation, whilst still allowing for julia code generation.

That being said, if someone wanted to write a quick-and-dirty DAE solver for internal use, that'd be great too.

from bondgraphtools.

scikit-odes has sundials bindings..

https://github.com/bmcage/odes

We should port the simulation bindings to use this instead of Julia.

from bondgraphtools.

OK, I had not in mind the ODE vs DAE issue. I've never used scikit.odes, but it sounds like a reasonable dependency. Their README claims a Python 3.3-3.5 compatibility which looks a bit outdated, but in common.py which feeds the setup.py, it's 3.5 - 3.7, so it's pretty up to date, with several fresh releases.

On my side, I've finished the Bond Graph course, and I ended up not doing BG simulations. I'll revisit this for the next iteration in November.

from bondgraphtools.

Release version 0.4 now uses scikits.odes for numerical integration.

from bondgraphtools.