On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 21:23 -0700, Jim Lux wrote:
> Hmmm.. The document on the Flex-radio website (referenced on the "What's
> coming" page) entititled:
> "SDR-1000 Enhancement Plan – First Half of 2006"
The major-rewrite decision preceded the release of 1.6. After much
subsequent discussion, it
At 05:12 PM 8/23/2006, Frank Brickle wrote:
>On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 16:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote:
>
> > But, what of the planned V1.7 of PowerSDR?
> >
> > Gerald, Eric, Flex officialdom, is this true?
>
>There's no news here. This has been the official position since before
>1.6.
Hmmm.. The document
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 16:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote:
> But, what of the planned V1.7 of PowerSDR?
>
> Gerald, Eric, Flex officialdom, is this true?
There's no news here. This has been the official position since before
1.6. The next Windows incarnation will be a thorough rewrite, deserving
the name
At 03:45 PM 8/23/2006, Frank Brickle wrote:
>On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 15:12 -0700, Jim Lux wrote:
>
>
> > Would this conversion of the dsp core of the SDR1000 further imply that
> > PowerSDR will not use the C version of dttsp in future versions? Is there
> > a schedule for when this might occur?
>
>
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 15:12 -0700, Jim Lux wrote:
> > > Is there any preliminary description of this development?
> >
> >Among the developers, yes.
>
> Would this description be suitable to see the light of day, or will we wait
> for it to be revealed at some time in the future?
We will answer
At 10:01 AM 8/23/2006, Frank Brickle wrote:
>On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 08:06 -0700, Jim Lux wrote:
>
> > But is this in PowerSDR (which is my frame of reference/context) or in the
> > Linux fork?
>
>Strange as this may seem, it's the Windows version that's the fork. It's
>intended that there will be no
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 08:06 -0700, Jim Lux wrote:
> But is this in PowerSDR (which is my frame of reference/context) or in the
> Linux fork?
Strange as this may seem, it's the Windows version that's the fork. It's
intended that there will be no difference in the future.
> And, I assume this eff
At 01:08 AM 8/23/2006, Frank Brickle wrote:
>On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 08:37 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote:
>
> > I
> > avoid saying UI because there is a heck of a lot of code which is
> > neither DSP nor UI. This not inconsiderable wadge of code is what I am
> > incorporating into a middle tier with a def
8 matches
Mail list logo
