There is a very specific way to name the enum for the AM type in tinyos-1.x, depending on the name of the message struct. This does not seem to be the case in tinyos-2.x (or the scheme, if any, escapes me)
Is it then the case that the AM type specification of an AMSenderC is decoupled from the payload structure it is meant to handle? This coupling however does exist in the net.tinyos.message.Message class that mig produces for java out of the corresponding header file. koen...@nassovia.de wrote: > Hi, > > AMType is a "Port", which allows different Applications above the > AM-Interface to identify Packets destined for them. It means, that > when running different apps on one mote you don't have to implement a > service, that allows packets to be distinguished, AMType does this for > you. > > Enum vs. Struct: As far as I remember the names are identical, I > believe they use enums because they are better for the Compiler. But > it really hasn't occured to me yet, that this might be of any > particular interest. > > Tobias > > Zitat von Nikos Batalas <nikosbata...@gmail.com>: > >> Could someone please explain the role and significance of am type in the >> radio interfaces in Tinyos-2.x ? >> Also, how does the name of the enumeration specified in a message >> structure definition relate to the structure itself? >> >> Although the explanations concerning tinyos-1.x are quite extensive, I >> think the case is different for tinyos-2x. >> >> Could someone please elaborate on the subject? >> >> Regards, >> Nikos >> _______________________________________________ >> Tinyos-help mailing list >> Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu >> https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ Tinyos-help mailing list Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
