Re: [soft_radio] Re: SDRadio - what's next ?

[Tom Holden]

Would it not be more sensible, if SDR is to incorporate hardware control, that it do so to a standard API, usable with a wide range of equipment. Then any homebuilder of a custom tuner could write to the same API. This would be better than writing SDR to control one specific custom hardware and opens up the possibility of the tuner being controlled by other applications, e.g., Dream.   Such an API already exists in HamLib: http://sourceforge.net/projects/hamlib/ . "Hamlib purpose is to develop flexible and portable shared libraries that offer a standardised API to control any radio oriented equipment through a computer interface." Dozens of receivers and transceivers are already supported.   Regards,   Tom   ----- Original Message ----- From: F6EHJ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alberto I2PHD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Gérard, >   I have left all the details of the hardware to that OM, who is an expert > in RF > technology. He will then tell me how to control the hardware LO (I presume > he will > use a DDS) from inside my program, and I will do that.[snip]. > > 73  Alberto  I2PHD OK Alberto. This is not exactly how I imagine the hardware side. Identical configurations already exist and are not easy to achieve without  the same hardware exactly. Your existing software is very friendly because it admits many styles of mixer and LO which keep the project very open for amateur experimentation. Including all the hardware control (including DDS LO) imposes the LO (and the DDS) and the associated circuits I suppose, which reduce dramatically the opportunity to have its own hardware and exact duplication will be the only way to succeed. [snip] Best regards, Gérard/F6EHJ YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS  Visit your group "soft_radio" on the web.    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.