Re: Mini meeting Toulouse 22-23 april / Execution Engine

Herman Bruyninckx wrote :
| Terminology is indeed _so_ important :-)

Yes. While reading the last few emails from Christian, I had the strong
feeling that we really want to achieve the same thing.

I think we have to decouple the terms of "functional" robotics components
and "object oriented" components.

I guess we also have to define what a "task" is: something /on top/
of "functional components", which can also have exec engines and so on.

| Do you have concrete
| suggestions as to how to define the terminology in this context?

I think we can discuss about that during the mini-meeting.
(suggestions from people that do not come are still very welcomed, of
course :)

I attach two small pdf figures that compare a CORBA component to a
GenoM component. Maybe this will help us converge toward a terminology.

Basically, I think the only (but important!) thing that GenoM does (in
addition to the CORBA spec of components) is to structure the internals
of a component (exec engine/codels/comm) and define two class of
component developer instead of only one.

As for CORBA, you might understand GenoM more as a specification than as
an instanciated and fixed programming model. Of course, as for CORBA, one
will be able to implement several 'GenoM' (I would rather say several
modules : comm, exec engine, ...) provided they match the spec.