On Tuesday 16 November 2010 13:08:50 steve wrote: > On 11/15/2010 11:05 PM, Shamit Verma wrote: > >> Yes and that's the reason I added in the initial response: > >> > Where will the main 'engine' for the robot run ? on the > >> > robot's > >> > >> controller ? In > >> > >> > any case, for this use case you needn't touch java at all > >> > IMHO. All > >> > >> client side > >> > >> > stuff can be done using javascript. > > > > This was not about controller, that would in any case be > > independent of UI. Controller would be running on Robot and UI > > would be running inside a browser. UI needs to talk to this > > controller and JS is not the best option for that. JS restricts > > UI to http request/response based communication. > > Over-simplification much ?
The whole problem is wanting on the fly changes anywhere in the chain, the whole system being highily experimental. It is likely to be more than 2 years in getting a fair idea of the actual field requirements. If i use a c/py/whatever core on the robot and a suitable standalone UI I would be maintaing a lot more code than a browser based setup. Besides there is the everpresent problem of bitrot in standalone isolated systems like this. Further a browser based setup might help in simply plugging in additional frameworks (like VR) without too much problems. >From whatever I have read (and my highily biased everything-under-my-control view), it seems a lot of expermentation is on the cards. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
