On Aug 25, 2006, at 10:42 AM, Michael Lees wrote:
> I was curious as to why shuffling of events with the same time-step
> isn't optional. From reading the Schedule code, the sub steps with
> the same time-step (and same ordering) are extracted into a bag and
> randomised using the shuffle method.
> In some situations, particularly debugging it might be preferable
> to retain the order of sub steps from step to step, or even retain
> the order in which events were scheduled.
> Would it be possible to just add a flag which is set to indicate if
> the schedule should be randomised or not, or does something else
> rely on the assumption of random ordering.
We always randomize because that's all we've ever needed; and it's
not uncommon for other systems' schedules to do that too of course.
If you want a straight ordering, just put everybody in a Sequence and
schedule the Sequence once on the Schedule. Or assign everyone a
However if you'd like to remove shuffling, just comment out this line
if (substeps.numObjs > 1) substeps.shuffle