On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 5:22 AM, Martin Braun <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 08:03:52PM -0500, Tom Rondeau wrote: > > Thinking of the results as one large matrix item probably isn't going to > work. > > As you said, there's a system limitation at play here. What if, > instead, you > > passed the data along as though it were a stream of floats (or complex > floats). > > Along side that, the block that creates the matrix sends a "start of > matrix" > > and "end of matrix" tag, so the blocks down the line know what to look > for and > > can reassemble the matrix from there. > > > > > > I'm assuming that all of your blocks in the chain that deal with the > data as a > > matrix are home-brewed and not current blocks, so you would only need to > add > > the tag-handling capabilities to your blocks. > > Hi Tom, > > thanks for the suggestion. We've been doing it similarly, only without > the tags--following blocks simply knew what was coming and pieced it > together accordingly. The tags might actually be a nicer solution, much > more flexible. > > Cheers > MB > Precisely. The tags give you the ability to make runtime changes/decisions as opposed to having to figure this out initially. Let us know how it works for you. -- Tom
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
