Re: LDP and comedi

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, superaorta_at_tiscali.co.uk wrote:

>>> distributions.  To my understanding, there are a bunch of DAQ drivers
>>> in the mainline kernel that would benefit from a standardized
>>> userspace interface.
>>>
>>> Let me know if you have any comments or would like to be involved.
>
>> I would like to be involved, at least as far as the definition of the API
>> standard for data acquisition is concerned: I think a discussion is needed
>> first about how 'the ideal' API should look like. The RTDM people (Jan
>> Kiszka in particular) have done some very interesting work in this domain;
>
> This is where I start to get worried about the move to LDP, where COMEDI
> morphs from a small community of users into some large amorphous, abstract
> layer that begins to move away from the hardware into programmers wet dream.

Why should that happen, _if_ the "people from the floor" are taken into the
design loop...? Anyway there is not much that I would like to see changed in
the current Comedi API! Comedi has been hesitant to go into a "1.0 API
freeze", and this LDP offer might be the perfect opportunity to finally
make this decision.

BTW, what are, in the opinion of the Comedi users/developers, the real
'showstoppers' to move to "1.0"...?

Herman Bruyninckx
--
   K.U.Leuven, Mechanical Eng., Mechatronics & Robotics Research Group
     <http://people.mech.kuleuven.be/~bruyninc> Tel: +32 16 322480
   Coordinator of EURON (European Robotics Research Network)
     <http://www.euron.org>
   Open Realtime Control Services <http://www.orocos.org>

Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm

Received on 2007-10-25Z08:08:00