On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:03, smith mark <smith.mark1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as the result is concerned it seems right. But, I want to know that > whether this type of thing is conceptually right or not ?? > It is functionally correct, as you noted, but using GNU Radio this way is not very common except perhaps in automated QA code. Typically, flowgraphs run continuously, with data being injected into the graph via one or more sources and being removed via one or more sinks, and don't get started and stopped or re-run except in response to some application level event (like startup and shutdown, or for flowgraph reconfiguration). I think your use case would be better served by connecting your two flowgraphs using a message sink and a message source that share a common message queue, or even merging the two together, but it is hard to say without more information about what you are trying to accomplish. > I read that there must be only one top_block(). Please guide me in this.. > Having more than one top block is fine since release series 3.3, but requires more attention to detail as you have to use the start()/stop()/wait() sequence on each instead of the simpler run(). Johnathan
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
