From: Martin L. <mar...@ea...> - 2013-11-09 01:36:18
|
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 10:38:52PM +0100, Mathias Grimmberger wrote: > > > I think the next thing to try is to merge in the additional changes from > > your standalone version into the unified version. Would you like to > > attempt that? > > Yes. Great, that'd be really helpful. > Oh, another thing. I think I already mentioned that the Rigol DS4000 > and DS6000 series seem to be using the exact same protocol as the > DS2000, probably common firmware parts. > > So it may be useful to in general distinguish between the protocol used > by the DS1xx2 and the one used by the newer devices (seems to me to > conform to IEEE 488.2) and only use the series number to work around > specific quirks if needed. > > So in case a DS4000 owner suddenly appears we'd not need to amend much > code. And I'm willing to bet that the new DS1000Z series uses the new > protocol too... (no programming manual available yet). That makes sense. We can replace the 'series' struct member with whatever else suits, perhaps something like 'protocol_version' - or even just 'data_format' if it's only the waveform readout format that varies. Similarly, some functions can be named more appropriately. If we think the protocol is the same for DS2000/4000/6000, then e.g. functions like rigol_ds2xx2_read_header should just be rigol_ds_read_header. Use names like rigol_ds1xx2_read_waveform only when there is known model/series specific behaviour. Remember, by the way, that a lot of what you've done may work just as well on the DS1000 series too, I have haven't tested it there yet. Martin |