head	1.3;
access;
symbols;
locks
	ids:1.3; strict;
comment	@# @;


1.3
date	2001.10.05.19.24.57;	author ids;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.2;

1.2
date	2000.10.15.17.44.59;	author ids;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.1;

1.1
date	99.04.27.18.07.16;	author ids;	state Exp;
branches;
next	;


desc
@@


1.3
log
@wow! these new PCs we've got *are* fast!
So: further keeping up with Moore's law.
@
text
@0.03	2	100000	(MAX_REL_DISP, PLOT_HOW_OFTEN, PRINT_HOW_OFTEN)

star_1		4.5e30		-3e16 -2e16 6e16	-50  -60  70	comments
star_2		1e30		0     7e16  -1e16	20   -80  -30
star_3		5e30		1e16  -2e16 -7e16	60   30   -10
star_4		0.5e30		3e16  0     0		70   50   10
star_5		2.5e30		-7e16 1e16  -1e16	-40  -40  60
star_6		2e30		-7e16 -3e16 9e16	-50  -10  40
star_7		3e30		2e16  -8e16 -4e16	0    0    0
star_8		3.5e30		7e16  1e16  -5e16	10   -20  -70
star_9		4e30		4e16  4e16  0		50   30   -80
star_10		1.5e30		-3e16 3e16  4e16	-50  20   -10
@


1.2
log
@changed to keep up with Moore's law!
(The gravity program runs at least 10 times as fast as it did back in 1993.
 So, to at least partly compensate, we print 10 times less often,
 avoiding an avalanche of trace outputs; and since a typical run will go
 much further into the simulated future - for any equal amount of human
 patience! - than before, we turn down the maximum relative displacement
 tolerated, thus keeping the accuracy good over such a long haul.)
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
0.05	2	10000	(MAX_REL_DISP, PLOT_HOW_OFTEN, PRINT_HOW_OFTEN)
@


1.1
log
@Initial revision
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
0.1	2	1000	(MAX_REL_DISP, PLOT_HOW_OFTEN, PRINT_HOW_OFTEN)
@