dgay at intel-research.net
Wed Jun 30 08:27:12 PDT 2004
David M. Doolin wrote:
> Philip Levis wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 29, 2004, at 04:43 PM, David Gay wrote:
>>> I think that Phil is arguing (and I would agree) that we could have
>>> both if we only broke our monolithic components into smaller,
>>> replaceable pieces. You can still have the monolithic component (it's
>>> a configuration which assembles the smaller pieces), but you can
>>> use/replace the smaller pieces too.
> Agreed as well, exactly so.
> But I think there is assumption here that the
> application programmer has an intimate understanding of
> the hardware details and system code encapsulted by all the
> smaller bits and pieces,
Well this is to some extent unavoidable: if you want to use-only/replace some of
the smaller bits, you're going to have to understand what they do and how they
interact. Whether this involves hardware details would really depend on what
this set of components was doing.
> and that the application programmer
> is expected to do this wiring into larger components as well.
No. The original designer is responsible for creating both the bits and pieces
and the larger components.
More information about the Tinyos-devel