Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Ascom-x

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default Ascom-x

    @ Bob Denny
    after 2 year, what about the interesting ASCOM-X ?
    On the reported website I cannot find information for ASCOM and Linux.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Mesa, AZ
    Posts
    26,860

    Default

    The problem is that people don't "get" the idea of language-independence. They keep wanting to make it "cross platform" - Write Once Run Anywhere. That would force all astro programs that use drivers to be in one language, or force us to write driovers for each language and for each device. Ridiculous. There is no language independence on MacOS or Linux, so those people can't seem to conceive of it. Instead, the discussion has run on forever debating TCP vs UDP and how to deal with cheap devices with tiny microcontrollers, etc. Several of us have tried to re-start the discussion in a guided way, but it always seems to get off track. THe last attempt by me (a few weeks ago) resulted in somone calling me an "ass" for claiming language independence. He just doesn't get it and he is an "ass" as well!
    -- Bob

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Denny View Post
    The problem is that people don't "get" the idea of language-independence. They keep wanting to make it "cross platform" - Write Once Run Anywhere.
    for an open standard, both things are important, toghether cross-vendor.
    On the ASCOM web site I cannot find the license.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Denny View Post
    That would force all astro programs that use drivers to be in one language, or force us to write driovers for each language and for each device. Ridiculous. There is no language independence on MacOS or Linux, so those people can't seem to conceive of it.
    I do not know the details, but I know that the Application Binary Interfaces for C (an ANSI standard) is different to the one for C++ (that changes with compilers too), and so for many other languages.
    Sure many opensource libraries developed for Linux (I do not know on MacOsX or Win32), can be used by all supported languages. They have bindings. For example see to QT and GTK+ bindings, support many many lanaguages, at compile time, but also at runtime, dynamic or static linking. All this without the need of an intermediate level between sources and binary like the bytecode of Mono (.Net on Win32). With C# all is easily off course. Take care the most of the programmers use C at this time. Surely Ascom-x can use the same open technology, on Windows too.
    Reference:
    http://www.gtk.org/language-bindings.html
    http://qt.nokia.com/products/program...nguage-support

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Denny View Post
    Instead, the discussion has run on forever debating TCP vs UDP and how to deal with cheap devices with tiny microcontrollers, etc. Several of us have tried to re-start the discussion in a guided way, but it always seems to get off track. THe last attempt by me (a few weeks ago) resulted in somone calling me an "ass" for claiming language independence. He just doesn't get it and he is an "ass" as well!
    sorry for them. I worked many years in a telecom company developing switching hardware and then drivers. My opinion is that TCP is for unrealiable network, where packet loss, retrasmission, duplicated frames, out of order are common, like internet, wireless and geographical network. For LAN, or point to point like PC to telescope, where never happen such nasty things (I rarely saw lost of ethernet frames in a working LAN), sure UDP is best fitted. As a second advantage UDP is easily hardware support-able (or require a simple software stack). As a thirth advantage it has less band and cpu power overhead.

  4. #4

    Default

    some approaches require using standards like CORBA:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_...r_Architecture
    that define structures for data and call convention to link agaist many platform and languages. So if your code is not wrote from the beginning with CORBA, you need some modifications to the sources.

    A simpler ready to go implementation is SWIG:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWIG
    http://swig.org/
    that automatically generate the wrapper for all the languages, starting from the headers of the library.
    This is 5 minutes opensource solution used by many steady (by long time) Linux libraries (see the tutorial), and work for static linking too.
    Last edited by Valerio Messina; Jul 20, 2010 at 15:34.

 

 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Is it better to use the native or ASCOM driver?
    By Paul Luckas in forum Hardware/Software/Driver Topics Not Directly Related to Our Software
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Feb 11, 2012, 04:20
  2. ACP 6 with Ascom 6 and DDW
    By Dave Gwyn in forum Hardware/Software/Driver Topics Not Directly Related to Our Software
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Jan 2, 2012, 18:20
  3. *** WARNING About DDWCP And Ascom 5.5 ***
    By Bob Denny in forum Hardware/Software/Driver Topics Not Directly Related to Our Software
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Dec 28, 2011, 20:36

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •