Re: Updated dataflow semantics for RTT

> W1.write("foo")
> W2.write("bar")
> assert(R.read(x) == NewData && x == "bar")
> assert(R.read(x) == OldData && x == "bar")
>
> so each writer overwrites the data sample from previous writes (think of a
> robot command).

Now we're getting somewhere. This looks like a bug to me as well.
However, you proposal really breaks buffers / mixed policy ports.

To me, this calls for having different behaviours for data object and
buffer objects: one data object per input port and one buffer per
channel. In all cases. It would actually both fix the bug you describe
above *and* keep mixed-policy behaviour as well as keep buffer setup
feasible (since sizing buffers is meaningful only on a per-connection
basis).

Sylvain
-- 
Orocos-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mech.kuleuven.be/mailman/listinfo/orocos-dev