>
> In fact one can argue very strongly PowerSDR should apply basic
software
> design principles and completely separate the GUI from the controller
> ("radio.")
>
Right. The way I understand it, this is what's been discussed for years
now as PowerSDR V2.0 and is what Bob N4HY was talking about.
[OTOH, and apropos of absolutely nothing, Bob's use of the term "light
weight processes" frightens me, as in MY world (operating systems) that
term has a very specific meaning. I certainly hope he was using the
term figuratively, and not in the way I understand it
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-weight_process>.
> IHMO, vCOM/Kenwood
> is a wonderful first cut at a loosely coupled standard between the
> graphic user interface and the controller.
>
The problem with this proposal is that interfacing at the transceiver
control level only wouldn't allow you to do a GUI with a spectrum
display. The control interface is fine, but the info flowing from the
control interface to the GUI isn't sufficient.
Logically decomposing PowerSDR into separate pieces would facilitate
LOTS of things. It would spur user code development, for one. For
example, there are numerous changes that I'd like to make, and that I'd
be willing to make, to PowerSDR. But I don't relish the thought of
re-adding my changes to each new revision of the code base. So, I don't
make them.
To Beppe IK3VIG: I LOVE your designs. They seem ergonomic, attractive,
and I certainly wish they were adopted for PowerSDR. Maybe someday...
de Peter K1PGV
_______________________________________________
FlexRadio mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/
FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
