John wrote:
> I appreciate this cultural difference between Computer science and
> traditional embeded systems people.
>
> It is very positive that this project has identified the problem.
>
> I fear that it appears to be failing because in trying to solve the issue
> it may have been adding another layer of complexity.
I was the person who added the materials about the CS vs. traditional embedded
systems developers :-) My thought was that yet another layer would be added on
top of the Embedlets layer which would allow the Embedlet components to be
graphically wired together using a swing-based tool. The graphical wiring
layer was never developed however for a number of reasons.
> I would very much like to know what work had been done before things
> slowed down to see if there is anything which can be used from this.
>
> Is everything done detailed in the mailing list or is there any unfinished
> work, Lurking?
What happened was that development pretty much stopped as soon as the code base
was proven to work. There were 4 or 5 of us working on this project and I
think each one of us stopped development for a different reason.
My main reason for working on Embedlets was that I was interested in using it
to help solve the CS/traditional embedded developer problem listed above.
My main reason for stopping after Embedlets was proven to work is that I
decided that running an easier to learn language than Java, like BASIC or
Jython, on top of Java was a better way to solve the problem I was ( and am )
working on.
Anyway, the Embedlet code base is in the CVS and it does work. As far as I
know, the email list archive contains all of the discussions which are relevant
to the codebase. Beyond this, if you have questions you can post them here and
we will try to answer them :-)
Ted
|
