Re: [pygame] GSoC - Graph module?

[René Dudfield <renesd@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I think that could be a good idea.   I think you should also ask the
python GSOC mailing list for feedback - as a non pygame specific
module.

Here's the 2009 GSOC python mailing list where you should ask:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/soc2009-general

You'll need to sign up to that mailing list if you want to apply anyway.

A similar note that I gave to another person RE AI module... make sure
you have points of difference compared to the existing python modules.



cheers,



On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Ira Fich <igfich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm a fourth-year Compsci major at the University of Toronto, and I've been
> thinking about proposing a project for pygame in this year's GSoC.  I like
> the idea of an AI module, but I think that even more than that, pygame would
> benefit from a powerful, generic, dedicated graph module, containing a
> number of functions especially useful in a game context.
> This would be similar to some of the popular graphing modules like NetworkX
> and igraph, but optimized for games.  In addition to the standard graph
> analysis and manipulation, it would include plenty of AI functions,
> including A* and minimax search and Bayesian networks.  On top of that, it
> would support symbolic graphs (useful for anything with a regular structure)
> and be able to recognize and generate planar graphs (vital for maps).  And
> naturally, it would allow for complete customization of nodes (associating
> nodes with sprites, for instance) and the easy integration of user-defined
> functions.
>
> I envision something equally well suited to modelling a world map, a finite
> state machine, or a neural network.  It's likely that this would interact
> closely with the Improved Sprite and Scene System project, as well as the
> math module, and possibly the networking one as well; I expect I'd be in
> constant communication with the people from those projects, to ensure that
> everything fit together as smoothly as possible.
>
> So, what do you think?  Is this a good idea?  Can it be made better?  Is it
> worth submitting a proposal?
>
> Thanks,
> Ira Fich
>